A small upgrade in speakers... The CLXArt a true masterpiece!

[Daniel M]

I don't see any cat hairs on my CLX - but my cats are short hairs so that could be why. By the way, I recently switched amplification to Pass Labs. I was not initially thinking the 30.8 would cut it, but these units are VERY conservatively rated and I am loving the Class A sound through the CLX. By the way my room is 23x16x8.75.

 

[KostasP.]

Hello Daniel,

Preconceptions, presumptions and, not to mention, ignorance are rampant amongst the so-called audiophile community ( this applies to all of us )! I can assure you that, provided the critical gain structure interfaces are given proper consideration, the XA30.8 is an excellent match with the CLXs. I chose this amongst nine other power amplifiers - valve and solid state - some costing FOUR times more ( the Pass Labs .5 series was really not at the same level either) and my dedicated room is larger.

I listen to SPL peaks of around 108 dBs, C-weighted, Fast, with uncompressed \ minimally compressed, wide dynamic range and often complex material and the XA30.8 never leaves class A! The synergistic symbiosis between the two is sublime, without inferring that there are no other equal or even superior combinations. The line stage \ power amplifier \ speaker \ room coupling is of paramount importance.

Cheers and be well, Kostas.

 

[Daniel M]

Kostas,

Well, I didn't compare to 8 other amps but I'm certainly happy with my choice (electric bills - who cares?) and I do like to rock out on occasion (though I have not measured dB levels). I'm using the Pass XP-10 preamp, CLX run full range with JL Audio e110s crossed over at 55hz which sounds good to me. I have GIK acoustic absorbing panels behind the CLX to tame the back wave which helped focus the soundstage.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

G'day Daniel M,

Ah! Certainly nice to come across another CLX owner. It's definitely a passion!
No doubt the XA30.8 can hold itself extremely well, both in terms of unflinching accuracy and handling that varied impedence swing that the CLX's are notorious for. That impedence curve is lighting quick, changes in an instant, hence this is where many so called highend amplifiers simply run out of steam... they puff out, need to take a breather, get back upto speed but definitely not the XA30.8. I've heard Kostas's system, amongst his fine gear carefully matched with the CLX's, it's a mighty fine combination indeed! I must also mention, the simplicity factor, keeping things simple, and less complicated with shortest possible signal paths, yields purer results.

Speaking of Pass Labs, I've also auditioned their top tier gear, such as the XS300 series on similar Martin Logan stats, more on the hybrid series, the Renaissance 15A and Neoliths. Very impressive but I sincerely believe that kind of raw power is definitely not required on these newer ML stats, which have a much greater efficiency rating. You also don't want to over-energize the room, that's when things get whacky and you simply can't enjoy music, rather it's just one big sound!

It was a few years ago when I first listened to that system, that got me interested and swayed me back towards ML stats. Apart from Maggies, Quads and the CLS IIz, which were the last ones I had, I ventured off ML for a while thinking it was not possible to further improve on their full range stats. However, after listening to this awesome system, from the very first note I gathered straight away, that's it! These are incredible and something truly special, the design and engineering team at ML have put together something radical and very different to the CLSIIz, Monolith, Summit and Statement Evo-II's, harnessing knowledge and technology from each of those previous designs and coming up with this. It's an engineering marvel!
Having Triple stators on the bass panels, which no other stat manufacturer has ever done, it's capable of some serious agility in the bass but the main amplifier has to be up to the task.

There's no other speaker I would rather own.
Although as secondary systems, if I was spoilt rotten for choice, I would still enjoy the Maggie 30.7's and Apogee Diva's, of which I did own many many years ago, driven by CJ monoblocks.

BTW, what does the rest of your gear comprise of?
Source, cables, interconnects, digital analog...
Good stuff Daniel, enjoy those fine tunes!

Cheers, RJ

 

[Lagonda]

G'day Daniel M,

Ah! Certainly nice to come across another CLX owner. It's definitely a passion!
No doubt the XA30.8 can hold itself extremely well, both in terms of unflinching accuracy and handling that varied impedence swing that the CLX's are notorious for. That impedence curve is lighting quick, changes in an instant, hence this is where many so called highend amplifiers simply run out of steam... they puff out, need to take a breather, get back upto speed but definitely not the XA30.8. I've heard Kostas's system, amongst his fine gear carefully matched with the CLX's, it's a mighty fine combination indeed! I must also mention, the simplicity factor, keeping things simple, and less complicated with shortest possible signal paths, yields purer results.

Speaking of Pass Labs, I've also auditioned their top tier gear, such as the XS300 series on similar Martin Logan stats, more on the hybrid series, the Renaissance 15A and Neoliths. Very impressive but I sincerely believe that kind of raw power is definitely not required on these newer ML stats, which have a much greater efficiency rating. You also don't want to over-energize the room, that's when things get whacky and you simply can't enjoy music, rather it's just one big sound!

It was a few years ago when I first listened to that system, that got me interested and swayed me back towards ML stats. Apart from Maggies, Quads and the CLS IIz, which were the last ones I had, I ventured off ML for a while thinking it was not possible to further improve on their full range stats. However, after listening to this awesome system, from the very first note I gathered straight away, that's it! These are incredible and something truly special, the design and engineering team at ML have put together something radical and very different to the CLSIIz, Monolith, Summit and Statement Evo-II's, harnessing knowledge and technology from each of those previous designs and coming up with this. It's an engineering marvel!
Having Triple stators on the bass panels, which no other stat manufacturer has ever done, it's capable of some serious agility in the bass but the main amplifier has to be up to the task.

There's no other speaker I would rather own.
Although as secondary systems, if I was spoilt rotten for choice, I would still enjoy the Maggie 30.7's and Apogee Diva's, of which I did own many many years ago, driven by CJ monoblocks.

BTW, what does the rest of your gear comprise of?
Source, cables, interconnects, digital analog...
Good stuff Daniel, enjoy those fine tunes!

Cheers, RJ

Sorry but the CLX do not quite do what the Statement E2 do if your room is big enough go support them. I seriously considered CLX when i had to downsize from Statements but i could not quite get use to the lack of mid bass and deep bass i was accustomed to. The CLX are great speakers, but the Statements play music in a different scale, dynamics and the ability to transfer a whole concert hall or a helicopter in flight into your listening room is unequaled

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Oh, looks like my last post confoosed... the plot.

Agreed 110% on the Statements, legendary sound and an absolute one of a kind, no doubt! No way the CLX's can replace the Statements, each time I get a chance to experience them driven with Momentum amplifiers and Relentless monoblocks, they will always remain as my ultimate reference. Sad ML didn't ever continue with their series but I guess all good things come to an end. Having the Neoliths in the line up, I guess is their new Statement. However, having listened to both, I can say it's basically not a Statement Evolution product. Perhaps similar tech taken from it to finalise the Neoliths in terms of dynamics and scale but very different in most aspects.

Maintaining Statements is not easy either, owners who did have then required specialist techs to arrive at home at conduct service if required. Assembly was another challenge. The main criteria behind the Neoliths was to design and build a hybrid stat that was fully assembled and would fit through the average size door of any home, without requiring assembled parts. The ML team certainly accomplished that!

Cheers to the Statements! For those who have them, hold onto them, like no other.
Best, RJ

 

[Lagonda]

The Statements where from a time when one man, Gayle Sanders and his vision could supersede cost and profitability concern, that company is run differently without him Even 120000 $ they where probably not profitable, a lot of drivers and materials where purchased from other producers, and the manpower used manufacturing them and setting them up where substantial. I had a 2 man crew fly in from across the country to set them up, and 3 additional visits to dial them in.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Ah! That legendary sound.

Fantastic stuff Lagonda. Do you still have the Statements, and what amplification are you using?Are they configured in bi-amp or tri-amp mode?

Would be superb to experience these legends again. Once they get going, there's really nothing quite like them. Even with the LF towers, the integration was very finely tuned and well designed by the legend himself, Gale. Even to this day, hybrids and others that use multiple LF drivers can't seem to get that blend / balance quite right, even with or without DSP. I'm not sure how Gale and his team accomplished this back then. Simple marvellous!

Cheers mate, enjoy those legends!
RJ

 

[Lagonda]

Ah! That legendary sound.

Fantastic stuff Lagonda. Do you still have the Statements, and what amplification are you using?Are they configured in bi-amp or tri-amp mode?

Would be superb to experience these legends again. Once they get going, there's really nothing quite like them. Even with the LF towers, the integration was very finely tuned and well designed by the legend himself, Gale. Even to this day, hybrids and others that use multiple LF drivers can't seem to get that blend / balance quite right, even with or without DSP. I'm not sure how Gale and his team accomplished this back then. Simple marvellous!

Cheers mate, enjoy those legends!
RJ

Regretfully i sold them when i moved back to Europe, i did not have the room for them anymore. I have since found a set of Statement sub towers that i use with my MBL 101 E speakers, but i miss the grandeur of the Statement, they are special !

 

[KostasP.]

Hello Lagonda,

Whilst you are entirely entitled to your opinions and preferences, I am compelled to respond in relation to your characterisation of ..."lack of mid-bass" of the CLXs.I would not have responded at all if you had said that you do not like their mid-bass. This is perceptually a mythical "fact" that requires an explanation.

One needs to be aware that the CLXs, due to the very low energy storage in their near-massless mylar diaphragm, DO NOT exhibit the levels of distortion, colourations and resonances prevalent in other speaker designs, no matter how elaborate their designs and implementations. Dynamic woofers ( due to to the moving mass of their drivers ) exhibit the phenomenon of "overshooting" and "settling time"of the cone drivers which, coupled with the resonances of their enclosures, induce a sonic "thickness" ( amongst other detrimental by-products ) perceived as "body" and "weight". There is no "lack of mid-bass" in the CLXs; they just give you pure mid-bass......ADDED mid-bass is what you prefer!

Of course, one is free and has the right to like this sound BUT, it is a colouration, an additive, an enhancement .....a distortion ( distortion being defined as the difference between received signal and its subsequent replication ). Match the CLXs with a high-bias current power amplifier able to provide them with constant power \ current at ANY frequency, together with synergistic ancillary equipment in an acoustically conducive room and their virtuous transparency, speed and linearity render them a beguiling transducer, able to unpick minute sonic subtleties \ infections and articulate them with unparalleled clarity, diction and eloquence.
Given that EVERY component has limitations and compromises ( especially speakers ), the merits of the CLXs, for me, overshadow and transcend their intrinsic compromises. By the way, the quality of their bass - tuneful, defined, articulate, fast and pure - is ONE of their many attributes! Helicopters, canons and bombs have NO place in my life and listening room at all. Be well, keep safe and continue enjoying your great system.

Cheers from the Antipodes, Kostas.

 

[Lagonda]

Hello Lagonda,

Whilst you are entirely entitled to your opinions and preferences, I am compelled to respond in relation to your characterisation of ..."lack of mid-bass" of the CLXs.I would not have responded at all if you had said that you do not like their mid-bass. This is perceptually a mythical "fact" that requires an explanation.

One needs to be aware that the CLXs, due to the very low energy storage in their near-massless mylar diaphragm, DO NOT exhibit the levels of distortion, colourations and resonances prevalent in other speaker designs, no matter how elaborate their designs and implementations. Dynamic woofers ( due to to the moving mass of their drivers ) exhibit the phenomenon of "overshooting" and "settling time"of the cone drivers which, coupled with the resonances of their enclosures, induce a sonic "thickness" ( amongst other detrimental by-products ) perceived as "body" and "weight". There is no "lack of mid-bass" in the CLXs; they just give you pure mid-bass......ADDED mid-bass is what you prefer!

Of course, one is free and has the right to like this sound BUT, it is a colouration, an additive, an enhancement .....a distortion ( distortion being defined as the difference between received signal and its subsequent replication ). Match the CLXs with a high-bias current power amplifier able to provide them with constant power \ current at ANY frequency, together with synergistic ancillary equipment in an acoustically conducive room and their virtuous transparency, speed and linearity render them a beguiling transducer, able to unpick minute sonic subtleties \ infections and articulate them with unparalleled clarity, diction and eloquence.
Given that EVERY component has limitations and compromises ( especially speakers ), the merits of the CLXs, for me, overshadow and transcend their intrinsic compromises. By the way, the quality of their bass - tuneful, defined, articulate, fast and pure - is ONE of their many attributes! Helicopters, canons and bombs have NO place in my life and listening room at all. Be well, keep safe and continue enjoying your great system.

Cheers from the Antipodes, Kostas.

I was comparing the CLX directly to the Statement E2 system when i commented on their sound. The CLX gets a little thin sounding at higher levels, and even 2 dept subwoofers did not sufficiently correct the issue, i prefer them without. If you have a acoustically treated combination 2 channel/home theater room, you will realize that the same capabilities that make music enjoyable/realistic sounding also will fool you into a perception of having a venue/concert hall or a helicopter/battlefield in your listening room. I’m not talking about a ”girl with guitar” that smaller Martin Logan’s like CLX do well , i mean large orchestras or live rock concert recordings.
The Statements often had me looking for events in my listening room or outside my building that where really happening on a recording or a soundtrack. My guess is that you have limited exposure to this kind of system, and yes the CLX are great speakers but not in that league at all

 

[bonzo75]

The CLX is pretty thin sounding, with top constellation amps or with audio research. I prefer the normal hybrids, and same with Ron. I would love to hear the statement. Let's plan a post covid party at yours Milan, the kind I cannot report back on

 

[bonzo75]

And yes I like Martin Logans and don't think people need to spend too much if they set up a good system with hybrids. Yes you can always get more with large apogees, big horns and some very good cones but not required. I do regret selling my Summits, I did that because at that time what I hadn't heard was greener

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Yep, greener is not always leaner Bonz!

I don't get that sort of thinness from my CLX's whatsoever. Especially driven with CJ amplification, it delivers all the density required. Infact, on another dimension, I've auditioned extensively CJ's top of the line, ART300's driving the CLX's, oh my! It's outstanding! So, I'm just about half way there... but I really don't feel the CLX's require such power to work optimally, it's rather all about the current capabilities of the main amplifier. I've already addressed that area of Class A bias to 60w, anything over 80w switches into Class AB, and my monoblocks are rated at a solid 125w. So that's plenty of Class A bias to drive the CLX's with ease, no strain whatsoever. Most demos on CLX's and stats in general actually do sound anaemic, simply because they run out of puff. The amplifiers fall short, they need to take a breather, rest up with a coffee and banana bread, and they're good to go again!

My very first experience with the ML Statements, was actually not the Evo-II's, rather the first version. Looked like a major specialised DIY project, basically a much larger CLS flanked by two separate bass columns. Driven by a full array of Krell FPB monoblocks in quad configuration, it was a bloody thunderous presentation! Very powerful, instantaneous response and all that sort of thing but bass was lacking some serious coherency. As the years passed by, that very same owner also acquired the mighty IRSV'S. Later on a few more years, the ML's were sold off including the Krells but he kept the Infinity's and then took delivery on the latest versions of these ML marvels. He mentioned to me that it's referred to as the new Evolution II's. I said Evolution what...? Just plan a trip and come on over for a listen. And so I did on several occasions! So there were these magnificent Statement Evo-II's driven by a full array of Momentums in mono config, bi-amped on the panels as well. So a few more years later, the Momentums are now driving his new Alsyvox X- series ribbons, his Statement Evo-II's are now driven by Relentless monos, his CLX's are driven by CJ's ART300's and the IRSV's are parked off in the far corner and his previous Maggies 30.7's were sold off to another dealer, who now drives the 30.7's with a full line up of Boulder amplifiers with a Solution preamp. Now, this particular system I've yet to hear but will get a chance perhaps when they eventually find a vaccine. I think Trump probably carries one in his back pocket... Milania doesn't seem to know either...

Anyway, addressing certain characteristics of the CLX's certainly depends on the amplifiers behind it. Their triple stators incorporated in the bass panels are so advanced and transparent, the sheer speed and agility in the bass, there's no man made sub that can match it. So to be thin or not to be thin, that is the question?

I personally don't ever want to be thin, nor would I like my music to be thin either. Being linear, fit and looking good/ sounding good is what I'm after. Afterall, if the CLX's were too thin sounding, I would've never purchased them in the first place!

It would have been a wonderful opportunity to own the Statements at one point, and each time I do get the chance, they are awe-inspiring without a doubt! However, the big muscles in amplification are required, along with a massive room. I guess that's the reason behind the Neoliths design, such large amplification and huge rooms are not required. Not as critical to the Statements, and probably now I do understand why Lagonda had to give them up. There's no point in trying to make it fit, if the room is not adequate, it will never work no matter how you convince yourself. I think this applies to any speakers.

Pure music is far more enjoyable when the overall balance is right, and then the music flows with effortless performance, this is what I'm enjoying already!

So cheers to that,
RJ

 

[KostasP.]

Hello again Lagonda,

Initially you mentioned "lack of mid-bass"; then, in your last post, that they get "a little thin sounding at high levels". Further down you mention rather presumptively and condescendingly "girl with guitar" and that I have "limited exposure........".

It is absolutely fine for you to compare the CLXs with the Statements and deduce any conclusions you want. However, this is not the point of contention. Your comments about the CLXs seem to infer that "thinness" is an intrinsic attribute of them. Once again, for the very reasons that I outlined in post #70 ( you may have to reread it), you seem to confuse linearity, naturalness and purity with "thinness" and prefer "thickness" perceived as density; you can prefer whatever you desire.

The "girl with guitar" remark is totally off-the-mark if you only knew the depth and range of music that I listen to. It may apply to others but NOT to me! As for my "limited exposure", I do not need to know your system in order to make comments directly pertaining to the CLXs, neither am I a fledgeling in this hobby. Although, to be fairer to you, in post #71 you clarify that your criticism of the CLXs was relative to the Statements and their ability to portray and take you to rock concerts and helicopter battlefields.....great, good for you!

Generally my "limited exposure" is confined to playing a number of string instruments, recording musicians in my dedicated listening room ( currently using a matched pair of AKG C414 XLS as my main microphones, TASCAM DA-3000 recorder and MILLENIA HV-3C pre-amplifier, although in the past I have used Revox and Nakamichi recorders ). Oh, and I have done some mixing in studios as well. So, I use recordings that I know as comparative references, rather than imagine how recordings were made and sounded like at the time and admire playback bass based on what boxes produce rather than knowing the EXACT recorded amplitude of those signals!

In the final analysis, one's system serves the subjective needs and aims of the owner and listener and he \ she is the only arbitrator that matters.

Apologies for the verbosity and tone and keep well! Cheers, Kostas.

 

[Lagonda]

Hello again Lagonda,

Initially you mentioned "lack of mid-bass"; then, in your last post, that they get "a little thin sounding at high levels". Further down you mention rather presumptively and condescendingly "girl with guitar" and that I have "limited exposure........".

It is absolutely fine for you to compare the CLXs with the Statements and deduce any conclusions you want. However, this is not the point of contention. Your comments about the CLXs seem to infer that "thinness" is an intrinsic attribute of them. Once again, for the very reasons that I outlined in post #70 ( you may have to reread it), you seem to confuse linearity, naturalness and purity with "thinness" and prefer "thickness" perceived as density; you can prefer whatever you desire.

The "girl with guitar" remark is totally off-the-mark if you only knew the depth and range of music that I listen to. It may apply to others but NOT to me! As for my "limited exposure", I do not need to know your system in order to make comments directly pertaining to the CLXs, neither am I a fledgeling in this hobby. Although, to be fairer to you, in post #71 you clarify that your criticism of the CLXs was relative to the Statements and their ability to portray and take you to rock concerts and helicopter battlefields.....great, good for you!

Generally my "limited exposure" is confined to playing a number of string instruments, recording musicians in my dedicated listening room ( currently using a matched pair of AKG C414 XLS as my main microphones, TASCAM DA-3000 recorder and MILLENIA HV-3C pre-amplifier, although in the past I have used Revox and Nakamichi recorders ). Oh, and I have done some mixing in studios as well. So, I use recordings that I know as comparative references, rather than imagine how recordings were made and sounded like at the time and admire playback bass based on what boxes produce rather than knowing the EXACT recorded amplitude of those signals!

In the final analysis, one's system serves the subjective needs and aims of the owner and listener and he \ she is the only arbitrator that matters.

Apologies for the verbosity and tone and keep well! Cheers, Kostas.

I am not the only one that find the CLX a little thin at higher levels, and as most full frequency electrostatic speakers dynamics are not on level with good hybrids. Most hybrids do not do imaging and spooky in the room voices as well as CLX or even CLS wich is a speaker i like for some music, but hate for more complex dynamic renderings. The Statements do everything very well, and my comparison was to them. As for your experience, i meant with the Statements, few where made, and not many have heard them. Studio sound does not really compare, as the mixing rooms in general are relative small and have very controlled sound. A owned a commercial studio with a large SSL mixer pult and a Protools program room for a few years in Miami. With a large 40K Dynaudio based custom built speaker system driven by 3 separate Chord amps per side in the main room, great for mixing but not able to do what the Statements can. Quite a few professional musicians/DJ‘s and famous mix engineers where impressed with these speakers. As for your tone, you seem to be a perfect gentleman, and i do find the CLX to be a great speaker that i seriously considered buying myself.

 

[KostasP.]

"Errare Bonzum est"

Hello Bonzo75,

My response in relation to your #72 post is covered in my above post to Lagonda; please read it. This is an opportunity for me to remind you that your dogmatic and often pre-conceived, camouflaged under a quasi-authoritative type of discourse is well-documented. You have not lived with the CLXs, only with hybrids ( nor with many, many other products ) and yet you liberally spring up and make ... de facto statements about these products and have a tendency to make direct and disparaging remarks about such products , although in this case your comment was not as disparaging about the CLXs but a falsity nevertheless.

I have compared many products in my pursuit to change equipment ( nine amplifiers, seven phono stages, five line stages ) but not once have I publicly named them, let alone criticised them because, in other systems and for other tastes, products of the calibre often mentioned on this forum may just be optimal.

You mentioned Ron as an endorsement of your own characterisation of the CLXs being thin - sounding. Big deal; it is just another preference for a "thickened" sound, induced \ enhanced by woofers. Dislike the sound of the CLXs ; this is your prerogative but the REASONS for disliking them is what I object to, as I consider them unsubstantiated and false.

All the best in finalising your system and let us see how....critical you will be about your own choices!
Apologies for the tongue-in-cheek title!

Cheers, Kostas.

 

[bonzo75]

Kosta, the only time you post on this forum is to defend CLX. Sorry, but I have zero interest in debating with you

 

[Mark Seaton]

Ah! That legendary sound.

Fantastic stuff Lagonda. Do you still have the Statements, and what amplification are you using?Are they configured in bi-amp or tri-amp mode?

Would be superb to experience these legends again. Once they get going, there's really nothing quite like them. Even with the LF towers, the integration was very finely tuned and well designed by the legend himself, Gale. Even to this day, hybrids and others that use multiple LF drivers can't seem to get that blend / balance quite right, even with or without DSP. I'm not sure how Gale and his team accomplished this back then. Simple marvellous!

Hi RJ,

I'll add a little context for your experience as I was lucky enough to be slaving for a ML dealer when the Statements were coming to market, and had the pleasure of going to factory training which included hearing the prototypes of the Statement E2s in Gayle's basement. While obviously there was lots to be learned between the original Statement and the E2, remember that Gayle was really the driving force, salesman, and motivator, not designer. While Gayle certainly had the passion and directed the development of the Statement E2, the execution of that goal came primarily from their engineer, Joe Vojtko, who was making significant technical upgrades to most all of the products of that era and later more direct evolution of the designs in putting forth the "Force Forward" designs that used passive cardioid woofer designs which we now see in active form today. Gayle regularly gave Joe credit for his contributions that often broke from past practices. Having helped assemble a few sets of Statements including Lagonda's, to say there was a lot of engineering and substance going into those was an understatement. Given the time and technologies that were then common in flagship hi-fi products, they were both a technical and subjective accomplishment. I had many fun occasions after hours at the store to explore their qualities, and always admired how many things the speakers did get right, with the primary exception of working in a small space.

Every so often I re-visit the idea of following up a more current plan of what I had intended to DIY for myself back in college where I was working on getting enough points for some SL3s so I could steal the panels and build my own scaled back likeness of a Statement E2. I had the subwoofer drivers on hand, and ended up getting out of the hi-fi retail just before I got around to grabbing some SL3s. Some more modern versions of their panels could make for a really fun custom build.

 

[Lagonda]

Hi RJ,

I'll add a little context for your experience as I was lucky enough to be slaving for a ML dealer when the Statements were coming to market, and had the pleasure of going to factory training which included hearing the prototypes of the Statement E2s in Gayle's basement. While obviously there was lots to be learned between the original Statement and the E2, remember that Gayle was really the driving force, salesman, and motivator, not designer. While Gayle certainly had the passion and directed the development of the Statement E2, the execution of that goal came primarily from their engineer, Joe Vojtko, who was making significant technical upgrades to most all of the products of that era and later more direct evolution of the designs in putting forth the "Force Forward" designs that used passive cardioid woofer designs which we now see in active form today. Gayle regularly gave Joe credit for his contributions that often broke from past practices. Having helped assemble a few sets of Statements including Lagonda's, to say there was a lot of engineering and substance going into those was an understatement. Given the time and technologies that were then common in flagship hi-fi products, they were both a technical and subjective accomplishment. I had many fun occasions after hours at the store to explore their qualities, and always admired how many things the speakers did get right, with the primary exception of working in a small space.

Every so often I re-visit the idea of following up a more current plan of what I had intended to DIY for myself back in college where I was working on getting enough points for some SL3s so I could steal the panels and build my own scaled back likeness of a Statement E2. I had the subwoofer drivers on hand, and ended up getting out of the hi-fi retail just before I got around to grabbing some SL3s. Some more modern versions of their panels could make for a really fun custom build.

And thank you again Mark for setting the Statements up during a incoming hurricane ! I know we went for lunch the next day, but did we take the Lamborghini ? I did love to show of that car when i had out of town visitors