Upgrade or Downgrade of the Martin Logan

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Hi, I've heard that the Innersound speakers sound better than the Martin
Logan, is that the case? Anyone has the experience?

I have the Martin Logan Prodigy driven by a pair of Parasound Halo JC1
right now. How's the Kaya Reference or the Eros MK III sounds compare to
the Prodigy?

Just an addition comparison, how about the Magnepan MG 20.1 compare to the
above two (three)?

Thanks for your advice.

Lawrence
30 answers Last reply
More about upgrade downgrade martin logan
  1. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 5 Oct 2004 23:56:34 GMT, Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >Hi, I've heard that the Innersound speakers sound better than the Martin
    >Logan, is that the case? Anyone has the experience?

    They certainly sound *different*, as you'd expect. 'Better' is not a
    term which sensibly fits those two, since both are highly competent
    and have similar design credentials. Go listen for yourself.

    >I have the Martin Logan Prodigy driven by a pair of Parasound Halo JC1
    >right now. How's the Kaya Reference or the Eros MK III sounds compare to
    >the Prodigy?

    No way to tell, since they're not in your room. Go listen for
    yourself. In particular, get a home demo. With speakers like these, a
    home demo is *essential*.

    BTW, I can see where you're coming from on amps, since Parasound uses
    the NAD model of local design and overseas manufacture. Rest assured
    that this John Curl design (hence the JC1) is as good as anything made
    by Halcro or Mark Levinson (did you know that John Curl has also
    designed ML products?), and has enough power to drive any reasonable
    speaker.

    >Just an addition comparison, how about the Magnepan MG 20.1 compare to the
    >above two (three)?

    Entirely different room interaction with the big Maggies, especially
    in the bass. Are they 'better'? Who knows? Go listen for yourself.

    In a more general sense, why do you want other people's opinions on
    the sound of speakers? Especially with the planar types you mention,
    they will vary *enormously* depending on the kind of room they're in,
    so despite both being high quality speakers with large dipole
    radiators, my Apogees are not going to sound anything like your
    Prodigys, since they are in entirely different rooms. Understanding
    such basics is *essential* to advancing the overall sound quality of
    your system.
    --

    Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  2. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:ck1vse02h3s@news4.newsguy.com...
    > On 5 Oct 2004 23:56:34 GMT, Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > >Hi, I've heard that the Innersound speakers sound better than the Martin
    > >Logan, is that the case? Anyone has the experience?
    >
    > They certainly sound *different*, as you'd expect. 'Better' is not a
    > term which sensibly fits those two, since both are highly competent
    > and have similar design credentials. Go listen for yourself.
    >
    > >I have the Martin Logan Prodigy driven by a pair of Parasound Halo JC1
    > >right now. How's the Kaya Reference or the Eros MK III sounds compare to
    > >the Prodigy?
    >
    > No way to tell, since they're not in your room. Go listen for
    > yourself. In particular, get a home demo. With speakers like these, a
    > home demo is *essential*.
    >
    > BTW, I can see where you're coming from on amps, since Parasound uses
    > the NAD model of local design and overseas manufacture. Rest assured
    > that this John Curl design (hence the JC1) is as good as anything made
    > by Halcro or Mark Levinson (did you know that John Curl has also
    > designed ML products?), and has enough power to drive any reasonable
    > speaker.
    >
    > >Just an addition comparison, how about the Magnepan MG 20.1 compare to
    the
    > >above two (three)?
    >
    > Entirely different room interaction with the big Maggies, especially
    > in the bass. Are they 'better'? Who knows? Go listen for yourself.
    >
    > In a more general sense, why do you want other people's opinions on
    > the sound of speakers? Especially with the planar types you mention,
    > they will vary *enormously* depending on the kind of room they're in,
    > so despite both being high quality speakers with large dipole
    > radiators, my Apogees are not going to sound anything like your
    > Prodigys, since they are in entirely different rooms. Understanding
    > such basics is *essential* to advancing the overall sound quality of
    > your system.
    > --
    >

    An in home audition of a MG 20.1? Neat trick if you can do it.
  3. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 7 Oct 2004 03:15:14 GMT, "Norman M. Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net>
    wrote:

    >"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
    >news:ck1vse02h3s@news4.newsguy.com...
    >> On 5 Oct 2004 23:56:34 GMT, Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Hi, I've heard that the Innersound speakers sound better than the Martin
    >> >Logan, is that the case? Anyone has the experience?
    >>
    >> They certainly sound *different*, as you'd expect. 'Better' is not a
    >> term which sensibly fits those two, since both are highly competent
    >> and have similar design credentials. Go listen for yourself.
    >>
    >> >I have the Martin Logan Prodigy driven by a pair of Parasound Halo JC1
    >> >right now. How's the Kaya Reference or the Eros MK III sounds compare to
    >> >the Prodigy?
    >>
    >> No way to tell, since they're not in your room. Go listen for
    >> yourself. In particular, get a home demo. With speakers like these, a
    >> home demo is *essential*.
    >>
    >> BTW, I can see where you're coming from on amps, since Parasound uses
    >> the NAD model of local design and overseas manufacture. Rest assured
    >> that this John Curl design (hence the JC1) is as good as anything made
    >> by Halcro or Mark Levinson (did you know that John Curl has also
    >> designed ML products?), and has enough power to drive any reasonable
    >> speaker.
    >>
    >> >Just an addition comparison, how about the Magnepan MG 20.1 compare to
    >the
    >> >above two (three)?
    >>
    >> Entirely different room interaction with the big Maggies, especially
    >> in the bass. Are they 'better'? Who knows? Go listen for yourself.
    >>
    >> In a more general sense, why do you want other people's opinions on
    >> the sound of speakers? Especially with the planar types you mention,
    >> they will vary *enormously* depending on the kind of room they're in,
    >> so despite both being high quality speakers with large dipole
    >> radiators, my Apogees are not going to sound anything like your
    >> Prodigys, since they are in entirely different rooms. Understanding
    >> such basics is *essential* to advancing the overall sound quality of
    >> your system.
    >> --
    >>
    >An in home audition of a MG 20.1? Neat trick if you can do it.

    But otherwise, there's simply *no* point in giving advice, since large
    planar dipoles are acutely room-sensitive. Besides, any dealer selling
    MG 20s should without question be offering a 'money back' home trial
    of at least two weeks. If you can't afford to pony up for that, how
    were you going to pay for the speakers in the first place?
    --

    Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  4. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in
    news:ck1vse02h3s@news4.newsguy.com:

    > In a more general sense, why do you want other people's opinions on
    > the sound of speakers? Especially with the planar types you mention,
    > they will vary *enormously* depending on the kind of room they're in,
    > so despite both being high quality speakers with large dipole
    > radiators, my Apogees are not going to sound anything like your
    > Prodigys, since they are in entirely different rooms. Understanding
    > such basics is *essential* to advancing the overall sound quality of
    > your system.

    First, thank you Mr. Pinkerton for your feedback.

    Second, in a more general sense, the purpose of this forum is for people to
    ask questions and/or opinions. If everybody think, "Well, why should I ask
    questions / opinions, I just go test drive myself." Then this forum will be
    useless other than for people argue about DBT!

    Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among different
    products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it becomes pure
    subjective?

    If you don't know, just say it or not reply to this thread.

    Thanks!

    Lawrence
  5. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among different
    > products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it becomes pure
    > subjective?

    Do you disagree that all speakers have audible flaws that are severe enough in
    degree and number to render them 'accurate' in the sense that amplifiers are
    that they can be chosen in the same way?
  6. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
    >
    > Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among different
    > products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it becomes pure
    > subjective?
    >
    Because scientific comparison demonstrates that, when it comes to
    speakers, it really is purely subjective, at least in a practical
    sense. Speakers, unlike (most) amps and wires, really do sound
    different. There's some good research that correlates listener
    preferences with speaker measurements, but those measurements are far
    more detailed than anything you can find on a spec sheet. So all the
    average consumer has to go on is his ears--or somebody else's ears.
    Stewart was merely suggesting that you go with your own ears.

    bob
  7. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 8 Oct 2004 05:17:48 GMT, Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in
    >news:ck1vse02h3s@news4.newsguy.com:
    >
    >> In a more general sense, why do you want other people's opinions on
    >> the sound of speakers? Especially with the planar types you mention,
    >> they will vary *enormously* depending on the kind of room they're in,
    >> so despite both being high quality speakers with large dipole
    >> radiators, my Apogees are not going to sound anything like your
    >> Prodigys, since they are in entirely different rooms. Understanding
    >> such basics is *essential* to advancing the overall sound quality of
    >> your system.
    >
    >First, thank you Mr. Pinkerton for your feedback.
    >
    >Second, in a more general sense, the purpose of this forum is for people to
    >ask questions and/or opinions. If everybody think, "Well, why should I ask
    >questions / opinions, I just go test drive myself." Then this forum will be
    >useless other than for people argue about DBT!

    Depends what you want to know, now doesn't it? You want to be told
    something that is impossible to say with any reasonable degree of
    accuracy.

    >Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among different
    >products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it becomes pure
    >subjective?

    Did you not read what I wrote? If you have worked your way up to
    Prodigys (I'm assuming that they're not your first speaker!), then you
    should already know that (unlike amps or cables) almost all speakers
    sound very noticeably different. Since you use large planar dipoles,
    you should also be aware that moving them a couple of feet makes a
    *vast* difference to how they sound. Hence, aside from simplistic
    'things to avoid' advice on basically *bad* speakers (of which there
    are virtually none in the large planar category), it's simply not
    possible to say that one speaker of this type will sound 'better' than
    another in any given room. I've not heard anything better than my
    Apogee Duetta Signatures in *my* room (for my personal tastes, of
    course), but say Quad 989s might be better than anything else in
    *your* room - or they might not. Your Prodigys are fine speakers by
    any standard, so perhaps you could start by letting us know in what
    way *you* find them to be less than ideal, and we might point you to
    speakers which excel in those areas - there are no speakers which do
    *everything* superbly.

    >If you don't know, just say it or not reply to this thread.

    What I said was that neither I *nor anyone else* apart from you knows
    what a large planar dipole speaker (which appears to be the type you
    prefer) will sound like in *your* room. If you consider that to be
    non-useful information, then I suggest you try somewhere like
    www.audioasylum.com, where you will be absolutely *deluged* with
    flamboyant opinions on any speaker you care to name. The *value* of
    those opinions is perhaps more arguable....................
    --

    Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  8. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    nabob33@hotmail.com (Bob Marcus) wrote in
    news:ck6bbd02v55@news3.newsguy.com:

    > Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
    >>
    >> Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among
    >> different products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it
    >> becomes pure subjective?
    >>
    > Because scientific comparison demonstrates that, when it comes to
    > speakers, it really is purely subjective, at least in a practical
    > sense. Speakers, unlike (most) amps and wires, really do sound
    > different. There's some good research that correlates listener
    > preferences with speaker measurements, but those measurements are far
    > more detailed than anything you can find on a spec sheet. So all the
    > average consumer has to go on is his ears--or somebody else's ears.
    > Stewart was merely suggesting that you go with your own ears.
    >
    > bob

    No! That is totally unacceptable! When people said cables, pre-amps, and
    amplifiers made a difference, they said they can hear it, it is totally
    subjective, at that time, you guys said it has to has scientific prove or
    else you just imagine yourself.

    When it comes to something that you believe, you then said any scientific
    figures or measurements would not count, you have to be totally
    subjective!

    I call it double standard! So from now on, when people claim that they
    can hear the difference between cables, amplifiers, you just cannot doubt
    it because that is what you are doing in speakers!

    I appreciate Stewart's feedback, and I will go to listen with my own
    ears, but sometimes it is pretty hard to move around a Innersound
    speakers or a Magneplan.

    Lawrence
  9. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:ck57g102r40@news2.newsguy.com...

    > >An in home audition of a MG 20.1? Neat trick if you can do it.
    >
    > But otherwise, there's simply *no* point in giving advice, since large
    > planar dipoles are acutely room-sensitive. Besides, any dealer selling
    > MG 20s should without question be offering a 'money back' home trial
    > of at least two weeks. If you can't afford to pony up for that, how
    > were you going to pay for the speakers in the first place?
    > --

    It is assumed we are not putzing around here and that we have the funds
    available not only to purchase the speakers but also own the equipment
    necessary for their satisfactory amplification. It is also assumed we have
    appropriate living quarters for a suitable location offering their best
    possible sound (and that we will not have to move them about when we are
    entertaining so as to then trip over their cableing :-) Twelve inches
    towards a wrong location makes a huge difference in the sound of my Maggies.
    Are you suggesting that a dealer will sacrfice his floor model for a 2 week
    audition or is he/she to offer you a brand new MG 20.1 for this purpose? If
    the latter, once out of their original boxes and in your home for this
    audition, how are they to be sold, new/used? How will the speaker be trucked
    back and forth to your home? Who is going to undertake the cost of their
    safe packageing and transport in the event you decide not to purchase them?
    As I indicated, "neat trick if you can do it". My Magnepan dealer has been
    in my home attending to the ribbons in my speakers several times and in
    another occasion to install wire behind my walls and underneath a crawl
    space in another room used for HT. Yet I still don't not have the balls to
    suggest what you are proposeing.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 9 Oct 2004 04:52:41 GMT, Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >nabob33@hotmail.com (Bob Marcus) wrote in
    >news:ck6bbd02v55@news3.newsguy.com:
    >
    >> Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
    >>>
    >>> Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among
    >>> different products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it
    >>> becomes pure subjective?
    >>>
    >> Because scientific comparison demonstrates that, when it comes to
    >> speakers, it really is purely subjective, at least in a practical
    >> sense. Speakers, unlike (most) amps and wires, really do sound
    >> different. There's some good research that correlates listener
    >> preferences with speaker measurements, but those measurements are far
    >> more detailed than anything you can find on a spec sheet. So all the
    >> average consumer has to go on is his ears--or somebody else's ears.
    >> Stewart was merely suggesting that you go with your own ears.
    >>
    >> bob
    >
    >No! That is totally unacceptable! When people said cables, pre-amps, and
    >amplifiers made a difference, they said they can hear it, it is totally
    >subjective, at that time, you guys said it has to has scientific prove or
    >else you just imagine yourself.

    Correct - and you'll find that if you compare speakers under DBT
    conditions, you'll score 100% every time. Indeed, companies such as
    Revel use precisely this technique in the development of their
    speakers, to find out if some design tweak has *really* made an
    audible difference. Hence, the science *has* been done, and it shows
    that speakers do indeed sound different. It follows that judgements on
    speakers are indeed entirely subjective, and you should not fully
    trust the opinion of anyone else, since they will have different
    preferences and will be listening in different rooms. Personally, I
    can't stand overbright treble, and that personal preference would
    colour my opinion of any given speaker. I also have a quite large and
    fairly 'dead' room with no slap echo, so I can tolerate a level of
    bass power and depth which would be quite overwhelming in a different
    environment.

    >When it comes to something that you believe, you then said any scientific
    >figures or measurements would not count, you have to be totally
    >subjective!

    I said no such thing, and 'belief' has nothing to do with the *fact*
    that speakers have gross audible differences.

    >I call it double standard! So from now on, when people claim that they
    >can hear the difference between cables, amplifiers, you just cannot doubt
    >it because that is what you are doing in speakers!

    Utter rubbish.

    >I appreciate Stewart's feedback, and I will go to listen with my own
    >ears, but sometimes it is pretty hard to move around a Innersound
    >speakers or a Magneplan.

    Nobody said that getting the best possible sound was *easy* - or
    cheap!
    --

    Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  11. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 9 Oct 2004 04:57:34 GMT, "Norman M. Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net>
    wrote:

    >"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
    >news:ck57g102r40@news2.newsguy.com...
    >
    >> >An in home audition of a MG 20.1? Neat trick if you can do it.
    >>
    >> But otherwise, there's simply *no* point in giving advice, since large
    >> planar dipoles are acutely room-sensitive. Besides, any dealer selling
    >> MG 20s should without question be offering a 'money back' home trial
    >> of at least two weeks. If you can't afford to pony up for that, how
    >> were you going to pay for the speakers in the first place?
    >> --
    >
    >It is assumed we are not putzing around here and that we have the funds
    >available not only to purchase the speakers but also own the equipment
    >necessary for their satisfactory amplification. It is also assumed we have
    >appropriate living quarters for a suitable location offering their best
    >possible sound (and that we will not have to move them about when we are
    >entertaining so as to then trip over their cableing :-) Twelve inches
    >towards a wrong location makes a huge difference in the sound of my Maggies.
    >Are you suggesting that a dealer will sacrfice his floor model for a 2 week
    >audition or is he/she to offer you a brand new MG 20.1 for this purpose? If
    >the latter, once out of their original boxes and in your home for this
    >audition, how are they to be sold, new/used? How will the speaker be trucked
    >back and forth to your home? Who is going to undertake the cost of their
    >safe packageing and transport in the event you decide not to purchase them?
    >As I indicated, "neat trick if you can do it". My Magnepan dealer has been
    >in my home attending to the ribbons in my speakers several times and in
    >another occasion to install wire behind my walls and underneath a crawl
    >space in another room used for HT. Yet I still don't not have the balls to
    >suggest what you are proposeing.

    That you, in your own words, "don't have the balls" to suggest a 'sale
    or return' deal on speakers which may be quite unsuited to your room,
    does not make it a bad idea. I don't know what dealers are like in
    your area, but I have *never* encountered a 'high-end' dealer in the
    UK who was not prepared to allow such a deal, and I would certainly
    never deal with one who had such an attitude. What, if you spent say
    $5,000 on a pair of speakers that just didn't work in your room, you
    would be happy to keep them?

    BTW, I would be happy to pay for shipping costs in such a case,
    although the matter has never come up. In fact, my local dealer
    *insists* on making home deliveries, probably as a security measure. I
    have probably rejected a dozen assorted amplifiers and speakers over
    the years after a few days home trial, and this has never caused a
    problem. To be fair, I've spent the same or more money on actual
    purchases, so the dealers know that there's an eventual sale in it -
    I'm not just a 'tyre kicker'. I don't think I've ever taken more than
    a week to decide that something just wasn't going to work, but any
    dealer I've ever bought from has had a 30-day return policy - and not
    with any 'restocking' charges.
    --

    Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  12. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<ck7qqp01131@news4.newsguy.com>...
    > nabob33@hotmail.com (Bob Marcus) wrote in
    > news:ck6bbd02v55@news3.newsguy.com:
    >
    > > Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
    > >>
    > >> Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among
    > >> different products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it
    > >> becomes pure subjective?
    > >>
    > > Because scientific comparison demonstrates that, when it comes to
    > > speakers, it really is purely subjective, at least in a practical
    > > sense. Speakers, unlike (most) amps and wires, really do sound
    > > different. There's some good research that correlates listener
    > > preferences with speaker measurements, but those measurements are far
    > > more detailed than anything you can find on a spec sheet. So all the
    > > average consumer has to go on is his ears--or somebody else's ears.
    > > Stewart was merely suggesting that you go with your own ears.
    > >
    > > bob
    >
    > No! That is totally unacceptable!

    Well, it's the truth. If you can't accept the truth, you should run
    for president.

    > When people said cables, pre-amps, and
    > amplifiers made a difference, they said they can hear it, it is totally
    > subjective, at that time, you guys said it has to has scientific prove or
    > else you just imagine yourself.

    Yes, that is (roughly) what we guys said, because that is what
    scientific investigation has found: Two components with similar FR and
    measured distortion cannot be reliably distinguished by sound alone.
    >
    > When it comes to something that you believe, you then said any scientific
    > figures or measurements would not count, you have to be totally
    > subjective!

    No, that is not what we/I said at all. Scientific investigation has
    *proven*, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that speakers are almost always
    distinguishable by sound alone.
    >
    > I call it double standard! So from now on, when people claim that they
    > can hear the difference between cables, amplifiers, you just cannot doubt
    > it because that is what you are doing in speakers!
    >
    No, it's a single standard. Note that scientific investigation is the
    basis for all of the assertions I made above.

    bob
  13. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    nabob33@hotmail.com (Bob Marcus) wrote:

    >
    >Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    >news:<ck7qqp01131@news4.newsguy.com>...
    >> nabob33@hotmail.com (Bob Marcus) wrote in
    >> news:ck6bbd02v55@news3.newsguy.com:
    >>
    >> > Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
    >> >>
    >> >> Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among
    >> >> different products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it
    >> >> becomes pure subjective?
    >> >>
    >> > Because scientific comparison demonstrates that, when it comes to
    >> > speakers, it really is purely subjective, at least in a practical
    >> > sense. Speakers, unlike (most) amps and wires, really do sound
    >> > different. There's some good research that correlates listener
    >> > preferences with speaker measurements, but those measurements are far
    >> > more detailed than anything you can find on a spec sheet. So all the
    >> > average consumer has to go on is his ears--or somebody else's ears.
    >> > Stewart was merely suggesting that you go with your own ears.
    >> >
    >> > bob
    >>
    >> No! That is totally unacceptable!
    >
    >Well, it's the truth. If you can't accept the truth, you should run
    >for president.
    >
    >> When people said cables, pre-amps, and
    >> amplifiers made a difference, they said they can hear it, it is totally
    >> subjective, at that time, you guys said it has to has scientific prove or
    >> else you just imagine yourself.
    >
    >Yes, that is (roughly) what we guys said, because that is what
    >scientific investigation has found: Two components with similar FR and
    >measured distortion cannot be reliably distinguished by sound alone.
    >>
    >> When it comes to something that you believe, you then said any scientific
    >> figures or measurements would not count, you have to be totally
    >> subjective!
    >
    >No, that is not what we/I said at all. Scientific investigation has
    >*proven*, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that speakers are almost always
    >distinguishable by sound alone.
    >>
    >> I call it double standard! So from now on, when people claim that they
    >> can hear the difference between cables, amplifiers, you just cannot doubt
    >> it because that is what you are doing in speakers!
    >>
    >No, it's a single standard. Note that scientific investigation is the
    >basis for all of the assertions I made above.
    >
    >bob

    Bias controls are still a good idea for any comparative evaluation. But, even
    if you use 2 identical loudspeakers they will usually be identifiable because
    no 2 speakers can occupy the same physical location in any room at the same
    time. Because they occupy no acoustical space electronics and cabling do not
    have this as an issue.
  14. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 10/9/04 11:22 AM, in article ck8vo60l79@news3.newsguy.com, "Stewart
    Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:

    > That you, in your own words, "don't have the balls" to suggest a 'sale
    > or return' deal on speakers which may be quite unsuited to your room,
    > does not make it a bad idea. I don't know what dealers are like in
    > your area, but I have *never* encountered a 'high-end' dealer in the
    > UK who was not prepared to allow such a deal,

    The place I bought my Thiels from had a 3 month money back, and a 12 month
    return for 100% store credit on the speakers. Electronics were 90 days for
    100% refund.
  15. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Lawrence
    I'm not sure many of these responses will have moved you forward much.
    Stewart Pinkerton makes a valid point about each of these speakers sounding
    different in different rooms, but nevertheless....
    I own Innersound Eros speakers and like them very much. In my view they
    manage the transition between electrostatic and transmission line better
    than the Martin Logan equivalents, though I think latest ML models have
    improved in that respect. I can also vouch for the quality of their
    after-sales service (and like Stewart, I'm in the UK, so geography is an
    issue). But you really do need to hear them both, even if you can't manage
    this simultaneously!

    --
    Paul Graber
    "Lawrence" <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:cjvcbi02cab@news2.newsguy.com...
    > Hi, I've heard that the Innersound speakers sound better than the Martin
    > Logan, is that the case? Anyone has the experience?
    >
    > I have the Martin Logan Prodigy driven by a pair of Parasound Halo JC1
    > right now. How's the Kaya Reference or the Eros MK III sounds compare to
    > the Prodigy?
    >
    > Just an addition comparison, how about the Magnepan MG 20.1 compare to the
    > above two (three)?
    >
    > Thanks for your advice.
    >
    > Lawrence
  16. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:ck8vo60l79@news3.newsguy.com...
    > On 9 Oct 2004 04:57:34 GMT, "Norman M. Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
    > >news:ck57g102r40@news2.newsguy.com...
    > >
    > >> >An in home audition of a MG 20.1? Neat trick if you can do it.
    > >>
    > >> But otherwise, there's simply *no* point in giving advice, since large
    > >> planar dipoles are acutely room-sensitive. Besides, any dealer selling
    > >> MG 20s should without question be offering a 'money back' home trial
    > >> of at least two weeks. If you can't afford to pony up for that, how
    > >> were you going to pay for the speakers in the first place?
    > >> --
    > >
    > >It is assumed we are not putzing around here and that we have the funds
    > >available not only to purchase the speakers but also own the equipment
    > >necessary for their satisfactory amplification. It is also assumed we
    have
    > >appropriate living quarters for a suitable location offering their best
    > >possible sound (and that we will not have to move them about when we are
    > >entertaining so as to then trip over their cableing :-) Twelve inches
    > >towards a wrong location makes a huge difference in the sound of my
    Maggies.
    > >Are you suggesting that a dealer will sacrfice his floor model for a 2
    week
    > >audition or is he/she to offer you a brand new MG 20.1 for this purpose?
    If
    > >the latter, once out of their original boxes and in your home for this
    > >audition, how are they to be sold, new/used? How will the speaker be
    trucked
    > >back and forth to your home? Who is going to undertake the cost of their
    > >safe packageing and transport in the event you decide not to purchase
    them?
    > >As I indicated, "neat trick if you can do it". My Magnepan dealer has
    been
    > >in my home attending to the ribbons in my speakers several times and in
    > >another occasion to install wire behind my walls and underneath a crawl
    > >space in another room used for HT. Yet I still don't not have the balls
    to
    > >suggest what you are proposeing.
    >
    > That you, in your own words, "don't have the balls" to suggest a 'sale
    > or return' deal on speakers which may be quite unsuited to your room,
    > does not make it a bad idea. I don't know what dealers are like in
    > your area, but I have *never* encountered a 'high-end' dealer in the
    > UK who was not prepared to allow such a deal, and I would certainly
    > never deal with one who had such an attitude. What, if you spent say
    > $5,000 on a pair of speakers that just didn't work in your room, you
    > would be happy to keep them?
    >
    > BTW, I would be happy to pay for shipping costs in such a case,
    > although the matter has never come up. In fact, my local dealer
    > *insists* on making home deliveries, probably as a security measure. I
    > have probably rejected a dozen assorted amplifiers and speakers over
    > the years after a few days home trial, and this has never caused a
    > problem. To be fair, I've spent the same or more money on actual
    > purchases, so the dealers know that there's an eventual sale in it -
    > I'm not just a 'tyre kicker'. I don't think I've ever taken more than
    > a week to decide that something just wasn't going to work, but any
    > dealer I've ever bought from has had a 30-day return policy - and not
    > with any 'restocking' charges.
    > --

    I too have bought and auditioned lots of equipment from my dealer over a
    long time, on one occassion taken home his demo Sequerra 1 FM tuner for a
    weekend (while his store was closed) with no problems or reservations
    whatsoever. However I agreed to have the tuner back in his store when he
    re-opened Monday 10AM (and did). Yet I still would not either ask for his
    floor demo MG20.1 for even a single week nor would I ask to get home (one
    way or another) a brand new stock MG 20.1s for audition and perhaps only
    then to decide to stay with my old speakers. I would not want to buy a new ?
    MG 20.1 that (even) you had in your home for a single hour nor would I
    expect the dealer to be without his floor model for a single week perhaps
    causeing him to lose a sale to another dealer which did have a MG 20.1 on
    site. My last word on this subject is as was my first, "neat trick if you
    can do it".
  17. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "When it comes to something that you believe, you then said any scientific
    figures or measurements would not count, you have to be totally
    subjective!

    I call it double standard! So from now on, when people claim that they
    can hear the difference between cables, amplifiers, you just cannot doubt
    it because that is what you are doing in speakers!
    "

    There is no difference when testing amps/wire and speakers. Both are done
    by listening alone and the only result of the test is to see if a
    difference, any difference, can be spotted. This ability to spot a
    difference depends mostly on the differences rising above an audible
    threshold. With a distortion difference big enough to rise above the
    threshold, two amps can be spotted. In speakers there are many
    differences that almost always rise above the threshold, for example the
    room interaction effects. When speakers are of a similar design and with
    similar room interactions, etc.; the differences are harder to spot but
    are still enough different to hear in testing. Same test, same standards,
    same thresholds.
  18. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 10/10/04 12:04 AM, in article ckacc702949@news1.newsguy.com, "Georgie
    Charles" <georgie.charles@ntlworld.com> wrote:

    > Lawrence
    > I'm not sure many of these responses will have moved you forward much.
    > Stewart Pinkerton makes a valid point about each of these speakers sounding
    > different in different rooms, but nevertheless....
    > I own Innersound Eros speakers and like them very much. In my view they
    > manage the transition between electrostatic and transmission line better
    > than the Martin Logan equivalents, though I think latest ML models have
    > improved in that respect. I can also vouch for the quality of their
    > after-sales service (and like Stewart, I'm in the UK, so geography is an
    > issue). But you really do need to hear them both, even if you can't manage
    > this simultaneously!

    You are absolutely correct!

    I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will find
    that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to fill
    in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to be
    rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe that
    Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.

    I am sure you can get the dealer to let you listen to both types in your
    home - especially if you are pretty sure you will buy one of them since the
    transport and setup of each one is a pain for the dealer.
  19. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 10/10/04 10:58 AM, in article ckbimr0bsm@news1.newsguy.com, "B&D"
    <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

    > I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will find
    > that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    ^^^^^^
    Meant to say ...criticisms of the ML's and other elecrostatic hybrids ...

    > relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to fill
    > in the low end.
    >Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to be
    > rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe that
    > Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.
  20. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will
    find that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to fill
    in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to be
    rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe
    that Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of
    driver."

    The more likely difference in the electro / cone difference is
    radiation pattern of the dipole electro and the monopole cone, very
    different interactions with the room and the pattern as seen in the
    listening spot. "Fast" has no meaning in a speakers performance except
    as it applies to bandwidth. It takes x "speed" to produce a 100 hz
    signal, regardless of speaker type and no more.
  21. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    outsor@city-net.com wrote:
    >
    > The more likely difference in the electro / cone difference is
    > radiation pattern of the dipole electro and the monopole cone, very
    > different interactions with the room and the pattern as seen in the
    > listening spot. "Fast" has no meaning in a speakers performance except
    > as it applies to bandwidth. It takes x "speed" to produce a 100 hz
    > signal, regardless of speaker type and no more.

    Well, I have noticed that almost every crossover design delays the bass
    quite a bit. I experimented with Linkwitz-Riley 2nd and 4th order designs
    and found them inacceptably introducing a delay, which had the effect of
    what I call the bass is "limping behind".
    I now use a novel subtractive active xover I developed myself and now the
    bass integrates absolutly flawless with my Manger MSW treble speakers. The
    pulse response has become beautiful.
    BTW I will offer a little unexpensive box with a few controls, so this can
    be tried out by everyone with bi-amped speakers. The advantage is highest
    for very low crossover points(below 500Hz) or subwoofer integration.
    --
    ciao Ban
    Bordighera, Italy
  22. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Regarding "speed" of speakers:d

    "Well, I have noticed that almost every crossover design delays the bass
    quite a bit. I experimented with Linkwitz-Riley 2nd and 4th order designs
    and found them inacceptably introducing a delay, which had the effect of
    what I call the bass is "limping behind".
    I now use a novel subtractive active xover I developed myself and now the
    bass integrates absolutly flawless with my Manger MSW treble speakers. The
    pulse response has become beautiful."

    This is not related to "speed", the original comments were in the context
    that a cone sub and electro mid and upper sounded different because the
    sub didn't have the "speed" of the latter. Many sub woofers have phase
    controls, which can address the "time" mismatch to some degree, as can
    placement and swapping wire connections just as easily and with a greater
    range. The "delay" introduced is questionable with regard to audibility,
    this can be tested of course, grin. There is also the question of x
    amount of delay at all freqs and increasing delay with freq change. The
    former is addressed as above. In some research of audibility of the
    latter it was not audibile if matched in the xover region and smoothly
    changed with freq.
  23. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
    > On 9 Oct 2004 04:52:41 GMT, Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > >nabob33@hotmail.com (Bob Marcus) wrote in
    > >news:ck6bbd02v55@news3.newsguy.com:
    > >
    > >> Lawrence <cpleung0817@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
    > >>>
    > >>> Since you are so famous on making "scientific comparison" among
    > >>> different products, why all of a sudden when it comes to speakers, it
    > >>> becomes pure subjective?
    > >>>
    > >> Because scientific comparison demonstrates that, when it comes to
    > >> speakers, it really is purely subjective, at least in a practical
    > >> sense. Speakers, unlike (most) amps and wires, really do sound
    > >> different. There's some good research that correlates listener
    > >> preferences with speaker measurements, but those measurements are far
    > >> more detailed than anything you can find on a spec sheet. So all the
    > >> average consumer has to go on is his ears--or somebody else's ears.
    > >> Stewart was merely suggesting that you go with your own ears.
    > >>
    > >> bob
    > >
    > >No! That is totally unacceptable! When people said cables, pre-amps, and
    > >amplifiers made a difference, they said they can hear it, it is totally
    > >subjective, at that time, you guys said it has to has scientific prove or
    > >else you just imagine yourself.

    > Correct - and you'll find that if you compare speakers under DBT
    > conditions, you'll score 100% every time. Indeed, companies such as
    > Revel use precisely this technique in the development of their
    > speakers, to find out if some design tweak has *really* made an
    > audible difference.


    Harman/JBL appears to use it at least as much to nullify biasing
    effects of brand and appearance, when doing comparisons of
    different speakers.


    --
    -S
    Your a boring little troll. How does it feel? Go blow your bad breath elsewhere.
  24. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:ckbimr0bsm@news1.newsguy.com...
    >
    > I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will
    find
    > that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    > relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to fill
    > in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to be
    > rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe
    that
    > Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.
    >
    > I am sure you can get the dealer to let you listen to both types in your
    > home - especially if you are pretty sure you will buy one of them since
    the
    > transport and setup of each one is a pain for the dealer.

    Are there (m)any dealers which carry both maggies and ML products? IMO there
    are none. Since they are competitors it appears logical that there wouldn't
    be any. In any event I too am biased towards Magnepan and have owned one or
    another since the early seventies. Hybrid ribbon and cone speakers never
    really disturbed me. I've heard 8 paneled tympanies augmented by a subwoofer
    and loved them. The ancient HQD system employed (Decca) ribbons, Quads and
    Hartley subwoofers and if I can compare those with anything I have ever
    heard nothing even comes close. Using words often ab/used in audio circles,
    "too polite", "slam", "presence", "warmth" and soundstage", Maggies have it
    over anything else. They offer a wall of sound, place you right up front as
    close as anyone would wish to get (of course afforded by the recording in
    question), and can knock your teeth out when you turn up the juice, and are
    not steely ice cold as are some others (e.g. Apogees). If you have high
    current delivering amps capable of driving low resistance speakers, space
    for the speakers to "breathe", you are all set. If you don't tear down some
    walls, or move and acquire the right amps before you die because IMO
    Magnepan truly offers to die for speakers.
  25. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 10/11/04 9:34 PM, in article ckfcaq0277e@news3.newsguy.com, "Norman M.
    Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net> wrote:

    > "B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    > news:ckbimr0bsm@news1.newsguy.com...
    >>
    >> I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will
    > find
    >> that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    >> relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to fill
    >> in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to be
    >> rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe
    > that
    >> Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.
    >>
    >> I am sure you can get the dealer to let you listen to both types in your
    >> home - especially if you are pretty sure you will buy one of them since
    > the
    >> transport and setup of each one is a pain for the dealer.
    >
    > Are there (m)any dealers which carry both maggies and ML products? IMO there
    > are none. Since they are competitors it appears logical that there wouldn't
    > be any.

    The Sound Concept in Rochester, NY -- my personal favorite and the one I
    patronize - stocks both. And there are three high end stores in the area
    that I know of.

    http://www.thesoundconcept.com/

    The Quad dealer is in Buffalo, BTW.

    I suppose the exception proves the rule? I was surprised, too.

    > In any event I too am biased towards Magnepan and have owned one or
    > another since the early seventies. Hybrid ribbon and cone speakers never
    > really disturbed me. I've heard 8 paneled tympanies augmented by a subwoofer
    > and loved them. The ancient HQD system employed (Decca) ribbons, Quads and
    > Hartley subwoofers and if I can compare those with anything I have ever
    > heard nothing even comes close. Using words often ab/used in audio circles,
    > "too polite", "slam", "presence", "warmth" and soundstage", Maggies have it
    > over anything else.

    You betcha! The only thing I didn't like of the older ones, and the newer
    Quasi ribbons is that if you stand up, you hear the upper frequencies roll
    off something fierce.

    >They offer a wall of sound, place you right up front as
    > close as anyone would wish to get (of course afforded by the recording in
    > question), and can knock your teeth out when you turn up the juice, and are
    > not steely ice cold as are some others (e.g. Apogees). If you have high
    > current delivering amps capable of driving low resistance speakers, space
    > for the speakers to "breathe", you are all set. If you don't tear down some
    > walls, or move and acquire the right amps before you die because IMO
    > Magnepan truly offers to die for speakers.

    One of my co-workers is a major Maggie fan - he bought a house with the
    criteria that there be a large enough room for his Tympanis! His wife is
    used to this and puts up with it - I told her it was clear he had proper
    pririties! :-)

    I am discovering that I like Thiels as much as the Maggies - funnily enough!
    They seem to want almost as much current and complain mightily when they
    don't have it
  26. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    outsor@city-net.com wrote:
    > Regarding "speed" of speakers:d
    >
    >> "Well, I have noticed that almost every crossover design delays the
    >> bass quite a bit. I experimented with Linkwitz-Riley 2nd and 4th
    >> order designs and found them inacceptably introducing a delay, which
    >> had the effect of what I call the bass is "limping behind".
    >
    > This is not related to "speed", the original comments were in the
    > context that a cone sub and electro mid and upper sounded different
    > because the sub didn't have the "speed" of the latter. Many sub
    > woofers have phase controls, which can address the "time" mismatch to
    > some degree, as can placement and swapping wire connections just as
    > easily and with a greater range.

    But allpass style crossovers delay the bass, and an additional allpass will
    delay even more, only with a (DSP based) digital delay you can delay high
    frequencies. This is a severe limit of analog electronics, there simply is
    no possibility of a high quality delay for higher frequencies. Let us have a
    look at a usual crossover as recommended for THX. (80Hz, 4th order L-R)
    The lower frequencies will be delayed by 6.78ms(max at 52Hz) compared to the
    treble, which is not delayed at all.
    This means, that the bass originates *2.3m* behind the treble, only because
    of the crossover!
    If this is audible or not can be tested with DBT, I have done so(only with 3
    persons, but 100% recognition) and found it audible.
    When there is a kick from the bassdrum, you destinctly hear first the "plop"
    of the pedal with the "boom" coming limping behind. Anybody who has a
    conventionally crossed-over subwoofer will notice this. Also the bass seems
    to be not completly integrated, somehow a doubt exists if it belongs to the
    music.
    Please answer if you can hear this.
    --
    ciao Ban
    Bordighera, Italy
  27. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 12 Oct 2004 01:34:18 GMT, "Norman M. Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net>
    wrote:

    >"B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    >news:ckbimr0bsm@news1.newsguy.com...
    >>
    >> I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will find
    >> that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    >> relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to fill
    >> in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to be
    >> rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe that
    >> Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.
    >>
    >> I am sure you can get the dealer to let you listen to both types in your
    >> home - especially if you are pretty sure you will buy one of them since the
    >> transport and setup of each one is a pain for the dealer.
    >
    >Are there (m)any dealers which carry both maggies and ML products? IMO there
    >are none. Since they are competitors it appears logical that there wouldn't
    >be any.

    However, it appears from another post that there are several in one
    fairly restricted area, suggesting that there is indeed a fair number
    of fdealers who carry both brands. IME, good high end dealers do carry
    competing brands, as it's in their interest to offer a good choice to
    their customers. Some of the less scrupulous companies such as Linn do
    certainly go to some lengths to pressure their dealers against such
    stocking of competitors' wares, but I don't believe this to be
    widespread among reputable manufacturers.

    > In any event I too am biased towards Magnepan and have owned one or
    >another since the early seventies. Hybrid ribbon and cone speakers never
    >really disturbed me. I've heard 8 paneled tympanies augmented by a subwoofer
    >and loved them. The ancient HQD system employed (Decca) ribbons, Quads and
    >Hartley subwoofers and if I can compare those with anything I have ever
    >heard nothing even comes close. Using words often ab/used in audio circles,
    >"too polite", "slam", "presence", "warmth" and soundstage", Maggies have it
    >over anything else.

    Well, that's certainly one opinion, but if you like that style of
    sound, you should also listen to other full-range panels, such as
    Audiostat, Sound Lab, ML's own CLS, and of course the Quad 988/989.

    >They offer a wall of sound, place you right up front as
    >close as anyone would wish to get (of course afforded by the recording in
    >question), and can knock your teeth out when you turn up the juice, and are
    >not steely ice cold as are some others (e.g. Apogees).

    I have Apogee Duetta Signatures, and they are definitely not 'steely
    ice cold', they are in fact one of the most natural sounding speakers
    I have ever heard, even more so than the Maggie IIIC with which I
    directly compared them when purchasing. Of course, to coin a phrase, I
    would say that! :-)
    --

    Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  28. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:ckfihi01rn6@news1.newsguy.com...
    > On 10/11/04 9:34 PM, in article ckfcaq0277e@news3.newsguy.com, "Norman M.
    > Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net> wrote:
    >
    > > "B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    > > news:ckbimr0bsm@news1.newsguy.com...
    > >>
    > >> I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will
    > > find
    > >> that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    > >> relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to
    fill
    > >> in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to
    be
    > >> rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe
    > > that
    > >> Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.
    > >>
    > >> I am sure you can get the dealer to let you listen to both types in
    your
    > >> home - especially if you are pretty sure you will buy one of them since
    > > the
    > >> transport and setup of each one is a pain for the dealer.
    > >
    > > Are there (m)any dealers which carry both maggies and ML products? IMO
    there
    > > are none. Since they are competitors it appears logical that there
    wouldn't
    > > be any.
    >
    > The Sound Concept in Rochester, NY -- my personal favorite and the one I
    > patronize - stocks both. And there are three high end stores in the area
    > that I know of.
    >
    > http://www.thesoundconcept.com/
    >
    > The Quad dealer is in Buffalo, BTW.
    >
    > I suppose the exception proves the rule? I was surprised, too.
    >
    > > In any event I too am biased towards Magnepan and have owned one or
    > > another since the early seventies. Hybrid ribbon and cone speakers never
    > > really disturbed me. I've heard 8 paneled tympanies augmented by a
    subwoofer
    > > and loved them. The ancient HQD system employed (Decca) ribbons, Quads
    and
    > > Hartley subwoofers and if I can compare those with anything I have ever
    > > heard nothing even comes close. Using words often ab/used in audio
    circles,
    > > "too polite", "slam", "presence", "warmth" and soundstage", Maggies have
    it
    > > over anything else.
    >
    > You betcha! The only thing I didn't like of the older ones, and the newer
    > Quasi ribbons is that if you stand up, you hear the upper frequencies roll
    > off something fierce.
    >
    > >They offer a wall of sound, place you right up front as
    > > close as anyone would wish to get (of course afforded by the recording
    in
    > > question), and can knock your teeth out when you turn up the juice, and
    are
    > > not steely ice cold as are some others (e.g. Apogees). If you have high
    > > current delivering amps capable of driving low resistance speakers,
    space
    > > for the speakers to "breathe", you are all set. If you don't tear down
    some
    > > walls, or move and acquire the right amps before you die because IMO
    > > Magnepan truly offers to die for speakers.
    >
    > One of my co-workers is a major Maggie fan - he bought a house with the
    > criteria that there be a large enough room for his Tympanis! His wife is
    > used to this and puts up with it - I told her it was clear he had proper
    > pririties! :-)
    >
    > I am discovering that I like Thiels as much as the Maggies - funnily
    enough!
    > They seem to want almost as much current and complain mightily when they
    > don't have it
    >

    After owning Maggies, only Thiels and before that IMF monitors floated my
    boat among dynamics.
  29. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    "B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:ckfihi01rn6@news1.newsguy.com...
    > On 10/11/04 9:34 PM, in article ckfcaq0277e@news3.newsguy.com, "Norman M.
    > Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net> wrote:
    >
    > > "B&D" <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
    > > news:ckbimr0bsm@news1.newsguy.com...
    > >>
    > >> I personally have a soft spot for Magnepans - so I am biased. You will
    > > find
    > >> that ML's to be really nice - the only criticisms I have heard is the
    > >> relative speeds of the electrostatic part vs. the cone driver used to
    fill
    > >> in the low end. Magnepans use ribbons for everything so they tend to
    be
    > >> rather fast and uniformly so throughout the frequency range. I believe
    > > that
    > >> Quad is similar to magnepans since they tend to use one type of driver.
    > >>
    > >> I am sure you can get the dealer to let you listen to both types in
    your
    > >> home - especially if you are pretty sure you will buy one of them since
    > > the
    > >> transport and setup of each one is a pain for the dealer.
    > >
    > > Are there (m)any dealers which carry both maggies and ML products? IMO
    there
    > > are none. Since they are competitors it appears logical that there
    wouldn't
    > > be any.
    >
    > The Sound Concept in Rochester, NY -- my personal favorite and the one I
    > patronize - stocks both. And there are three high end stores in the area
    > that I know of.
    >

    I suppose that is what meant by "live and learn".

    >
    > You betcha! The only thing I didn't like of the older ones, and the newer
    > Quasi ribbons is that if you stand up, you hear the upper frequencies roll
    > off something fierce.
    >

    This is true, but why would anyone want to stand up when listening? Another
    problem which I experience related to *seating* elevation is that when I
    choose a chair putting me closer to the floor, the lower frequencies become
    bloated and the resultant soundstage is unattractive. I think the take home
    lesson from all this is that one must to be very careful and do a lot of
    experimenting with both speaker placement *and* seating position before
    reaching any firm conclusion as to faults and strengths of any speaker
    system. (People who perform room Equeing must be very familiar with this
    situation.) Perhaps maggies require more attention to this issue than do
    most other speakers?
  30. Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

    On 10/12/04 7:59 PM, in article ckhr450gll@news4.newsguy.com, "Norman M.
    Schwartz" <nmsz@optonline.net> wrote:

    >> You betcha! The only thing I didn't like of the older ones, and the newer
    >> Quasi ribbons is that if you stand up, you hear the upper frequencies roll
    >> off something fierce.
    >>
    >
    > This is true, but why would anyone want to stand up when listening?

    Good point, though I have been known to have stuff playing in the background
    as I putter around the house.


    >Another
    > problem which I experience related to *seating* elevation is that when I
    > choose a chair putting me closer to the floor, the lower frequencies become
    > bloated and the resultant soundstage is unattractive.

    I hadn't noticed this, but given how Maggies behave, I can see that as an
    "issue"


    >I think the take home
    > lesson from all this is that one must to be very careful and do a lot of
    > experimenting with both speaker placement *and* seating position before
    > reaching any firm conclusion as to faults and strengths of any speaker
    > system. (People who perform room Equeing must be very familiar with this
    > situation.) Perhaps maggies require more attention to this issue than do
    > most other speakers?

    I think the rewards for the "fussiness" of Maggies make it all worthwhile.
    I have found that Thiels are not nearly as fussy, though still reward
    "proper" placement.

    Though, many people want things that are less fussy to room acoustics and
    placement - and for those something a bit less resolving and a bit more
    forgiving is on order!
Ask a new question

Read More

High-End Audio Downgrade Audio