advertisement


Martin logan ascents

They lack the last amount of seamless integration between the bass section and the panel that ML finally nailed down with the Summits, but even so, there are very few speakers at any price that can deliver the detail, clarity and sheer lifelike sound. Quite a long way ahead of anything Quad managed with this technology, but I am biased as I have a set of Summits (and some Quad 57s).
 
JemHayward said:
No, just like the theory and the styling... So the reality isn't quite the same?
Click to expand...

I heard the Devaliet at a reviewers - who also had the peachtree Decco2 for review.

I so we compared the Devaliet vers the Peachtree Decco2 - it was by no means clear cut - the Devaliet really scored in the Bass dept - but the Peachtree was more open and a smoother treble...

But the Devaliet has really cool technlogy - incredibly well built and interesting ID design... but I'd say your Ears arr going to be a lot better suited to your system... Your going to loose the treble and openness - not to mention the sounds stage..

John
 
peelaaa said:
Hi, anyone have any experience with these speakers? I may have a chance to purchase a pair,

thanks
Click to expand...
i owned a pair for a while and used them with both krell and audio research power amps. i wanted to love them because they looked so good but i found them a bit dull and laid back for rock/pop i normally listen to. thought my kef 105/3 were in a different league with far greater clarity, detail and excitement. why i sold the 105/3 i'll never know!
 
In which way are MLs better than Quads (generally)? I've heard medium sized MLs and was impressed, but am after either the biggest Quad, the 2905, or the ML equivalent, whatever that may be.

I have the amplification for either.
 
I mostly listen to classical. The Ascents will excel with chamber music, guitar, single voice etc., but yo may need to add a sub for larger scale music, including rock. There strength is their 'see through nature' or transparency. They also tend to have a limited sweet spot, though the more recent Logans have begun to address this issue.
Del
 
I have a pair of Ascents driven by a pair of Exposure IV power amps,byamped. I use a Dual Regulated IV for the panel, and a Single IV for the bass

In addition I use with them a REL Stentor sub.

I have them sitting on some rsacoustics slabs which help firm up the bass
They sound great,very good with vocal music but not so good with rock music

You will need to vacuum clean the panels every few months to keep them sounding well

As others have said they have quite a narrow sweet spot
 
Mike Reed said:
In which way are MLs better than Quads (generally)? I've heard medium sized MLs and was impressed, but am after either the biggest Quad, the 2905, or the ML equivalent, whatever that may be.

I have the amplification for either.
Click to expand...

Mike…my reservations about Quads are mainly that their full range single transducer design is both their strength and weakness.
I have the same feeling about the new Quads as I have about new Magneplanars i.e. nice articulate bass but too weak for general use.
Not my personal taste but perhaps suits others.
The new active MLs sound positively muscular by comparison and this is reflected in their dynamic capabilities.
For some, the loss of top to bottom coherence (Quad) will be too high a price to pay for deeper and more dynamic bass.

Another thing that I found off-putting about Quads was that they always featured protection as a necessary evil. Arcing was not uncommon.
I’ve owned active Logans for 6 yrs, often driven to realistically high SPLs and never seen them distressed or suffer arcing.
The panels are virtually unburstable and you will find it impossible to cause them problems.
(More likely that the amplifier will break first.)
This said, for an electrostat, they’re exceedingly amplifier friendly (high efficiency at 92db or so) while the powered bass drivers effectively render the speaker bi-amped – again greatly helping dynamics and taking the strain off the main power amp/s. Matching is less of an issue than yesteryear.

Not only will you hear almost perfectly rendered acoustic instruments but they do rock music with some style. First time I heard Led Zeppelin from a pair of Vantages they were so visceral the hairs on the back of my neck stood up.
For me it scotched the notion that electrostatics don’t do rock music.
Factor in bass contouring controls for room matching and you’re virtually in paradise.
There are other hybrids out there but I doubt that any are as evolved or ultimately reliable as these.

There is the issue of the sweet spot. MLs claim to have a reasonably wide sweet spot. This is unimportant to me because if I were to sit off centre I alter the room balance and perspective.
I’m not suggesting sitting with your head in vice, it is more comfortable than that, just to be aware that faced with such directionality, room symmetry is King (which includes the listener).
Get these speakers properly installed and sounding and you’ll never want to leave the room. :)
Just my humble opinion….
 
I have had a pair of ML clarities for around 7 years now. I listened to the big quads at the time and didn't care for the sound and found I couldn't get any decent levels out of them.
I like my rock music and auditioned the clarities (Krell kav400xi and copland CD) at midland audio exchange and were totally sold. Only change is selling my CD player and running a NAS nad MDAC

After a few years I have listened to other systems and although I like the slam a good moving coil speaker provides I still prefer the ML's. Yes Led Zep does sound good :)
 
Wild_Bill said:
Mike…my reservations about Quads are mainly that their full range single transducer design is both their strength and weakness.
I have the same feeling about the new Quads as I have about new Magneplanars i.e. nice articulate bass but too weak for general use.
Not my personal taste but perhaps suits others.
The new active MLs sound positively muscular by comparison and this is reflected in their dynamic capabilities.
For some, the loss of top to bottom coherence (Quad) will be too high a price to pay for deeper and more dynamic bass.

Another thing that I found off-putting about Quads was that they always featured protection as a necessary evil. Arcing was not uncommon.
I’ve owned active Logans for 6 yrs, often driven to realistically high SPLs and never seen them distressed or suffer arcing.
The panels are virtually unburstable and you will find it impossible to cause them problems.
(More likely that the amplifier will break first.)
This said, for an electrostat, they’re exceedingly amplifier friendly (high efficiency at 92db or so) while the powered bass drivers effectively render the speaker bi-amped – again greatly helping dynamics and taking the strain off the main power amp/s. Matching is less of an issue than yesteryear.

Not only will you hear almost perfectly rendered acoustic instruments but they do rock music with some style. First time I heard Led Zeppelin from a pair of Vantages they were so visceral the hairs on the back of my neck stood up.
For me it scotched the notion that electrostatics don’t do rock music.
Factor in bass contouring controls for room matching and you’re virtually in paradise.
There are other hybrids out there but I doubt that any are as evolved or ultimately reliable as these.

There is the issue of the sweet spot. MLs claim to have a reasonably wide sweet spot. This is unimportant to me because if I were to sit off centre I alter the room balance and perspective.
I’m not suggesting sitting with your head in vice, it is more comfortable than that, just to be aware that faced with such directionality, room symmetry is King (which includes the listener).
Get these speakers properly installed and sounding and you’ll never want to leave the room. :)
Just my humble opinion….
Click to expand...

Many thanks for that, Mr Hickock (sp?). I guess you are referring to the newer Quad flagship, the 2905s, which do improve on the 989s, esp., I gather, in the bass and overall SPLs.

I shall investigate the larger/est MLs, as at present have no idea what's available. I do have reservations about nationality, though; from a servicing/repair standpoint, of course! The suggested panel life of (fairly local to me) Quads is said to be about ten years, but like older Naim servicing recommendations, one can probably take this with a pinch of salt. No idea about ML panels, though.

New venture for me; veering away from cone speakers after 45 years, but I feel I have to suck and see !
 
i have martin logan summits and very differnt from my beloved focal diablo/1028 but my word what an addictive speaker. BIG natural sound and work surprisingly well in a fairly modest room . using for several hours a night . i find they are exceptional with vocals
highly recommended
central audio has a pair of vantage too
 
hifinutt said:
i have martin logan summits and very differnt from my beloved focal diablo/1028 but my word what an addictive speaker. BIG natural sound and work surprisingly well in a fairly modest room . using for several hours a night . i find they are exceptional with vocals
highly recommended
central audio has a pair of vantage too
Click to expand...
There is a big quality gap between the Summit and the Vantage. I originally started saving up for some vantages, but "accidentally" heard the Summits. I then spent another two years saving, and now have Summits - twice the price, but more than twice as good. I think ML may have filled the gap with new models now, but the Summit is probably the best practical speaker I've ever heard. It works well in small rooms, it copes fine with our very low ceilings and stone floors because of its dispersion characteristics and they do everything the Quad 57s do, but better, and everything the active Isobariks did, but better.
 
Don't know how this would translate to the Summit, but my ESL2905's love being driven by the devialet. They lose none of their advantages but gain much more soundstage width, depth, and clean bass. Some of the sense of unflappable power that is usually the domain of serious box speakers becomes evident. The sound has increased liveness and fluidity, and it remains so clean - even as the volume increases - that the usual audible cues of high volume disappear and you end up surprised when you try to talk to someone else in the room!

The devialet has a pro-audio-esque configuration option which is very useful for these speakers. You can set an output voltage limit to just below the protection level of the ESL, thus greatly reducing worries about causing damage. One of the negatives of the ESL protection is that it can sometimes be activated on very loud transients whilst the rest of the music is quiet, thus requiring some gain-riding if you like very high levels generally. But with the devialet output limiting, I've been able to use much higher levels (96db+ at the listening position) without the ESLs ever entering protection and without being aware of any compression in the sound.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top