Amir's Impressions of Martin Logan Neolith at CES 2016

[Ron Resnick]

Not sour grapes because I said it before, when you asked Amir to take a look at the neolith. I said never heard a panel sound good the same panels which I later heard in a proper room

Yes, you absolutely wrote that before!

 

[PeterA]

Peter one doesn't only listen to tonal balance but also imaging and sound stage changes massively with toe in

Thanks bonzo. I have a good friend with Martin Logans and we noticed some interesting things about the sweet spot and tonal balance when I was last there. I'll keep this in mind for my next visit. I appreciate it.

 

[bonzo75]

Thanks bonzo. I have a good friend with Martin Logans and we noticed some interesting things about the sweet spot and tonal balance when I was last there. I'll keep this in mind for my next visit. I appreciate it.

Yes I follow ack's post, as he is a classical, spectral, and Logan lover. I should check his system once, will learn a few things.

 

[bonzo75]

Amir was there, we were not there, and I fully respect and uphold Amir's impressions.

Nothing to do with Amir's impressions. My point is my impressions of panels in shows too have always been negative, so if someone wanted to evaluate this he should ignore show impressions, listen to a proper set up, and make own impressions instead of reading into anybody's show impressions especially where a panel is concerned. So do your own listening of Neolith but not in a show.

 

[Argonaut]

I do not want to think about how bad the vibrations from the frame surrounding the panel would be with the traditional ML surround made of wood and plastic (and maybe aluminum?). I would have hoped the phenolic resin structure would be extremely rigid and solid. I will perform the same test the next time I am with Neoliths.

I would have thought the same Ron, with regard to the materials and design that went into this particular transducer, most surprising!
I can tho attest to the marked rigidity and non resonant nature of the CLX Anniversary with its high mass aircraft grade aluminium frame milled from billet, you would need to swing a mallet, or Keith's head, at it to register a vibration through the frame.

One of a number of reasons as to why I decided upon them.

 

[Lee]

Thanks Amir. Very interesting.

 

[Lee]

The rear wave of panels usually gets compromised big time at a show because of the room. They have either a glass window or a hastily put up cloth treatment behind them, instead of the flat wall that's recommended. What's a panel without the rear wave?

The bass is usually lost in a hifi show room

Panels usually used during a show have just been built in time for the big show, and as they are not burnt in, sound bright

The sweet spot is tough to locate and occupy at a show, and a panel is all about the sweet spot.

Takes months to get a panel toe in right, and it usually sounds crap till then.

You will really struggle to get a sense of space, soundstage, and imaging which panels do well in a hifi show room

Hmm, I've attended the last ten years of Rocky Mountain Audio Fest and numerous other shows and I find that good sound with panels is actually quite common. A few observations:

1. Many mfrs use the same room year after year so really no excuse to not figure the room acoustics out.

2. Magnepan and ML rooms have sounded excellent at times as have the Analysis Audio speakers.

3. Many mfrs at RMAF will bring sometimes elaborate acoustic treatments to tame the room.

4. There are several room "setup experts" who work for multiple vendors solving room problems.

And as a sidebar, I have heard the Constellation gear enough to know it is a high performer in a variety of systems so the electronics is not likely an issue although you never suggested it was.

I do think you are right on the money regarding panel break-in. That does take time and could be a factor.

 

[Jazzhead]

Amir , thanks for the in depth feedback . Lovely read and great pics . The Neoliths sounded good to me at last years Munich show ,with much humbler gear from Moon Audio . It was a fresh , out the box panel . No where near burnt in , but there was no denying their potential . Would luv to hear in a more controlled environment .

 

[amirm]

Amir, thanks for the report and I look forward to your other CES reports. Perhaps MF was there to hear that turntable and the SAT arm which he liked so much in his system. Amir, do you know what that turntable is? I've never seen it before.

My pleasure Peter. I was hoping you guys could tell me who made the turntable. Even in my high-res images zoomed in I can't find any markings on it.

No MF was not the turntable. That was a side conversation he was having to kill the time. He was sandwiched between the Constellation guy and Martin Logan and all the attention were on those.

Could you also speak a little to the panel integration with the woofer? In my limited experience with Martin Logan speakers, this seems to be a critical aspect to their sound.

I can't unfortunately because there was hardly any bass in MF's albums and all I heard on top of that was Patricia Barber which also had little to no bass.

If I have time left in before I come back I will go for a second visit and see if I can hear something different.

 

[amirm]

The rear wave of panels usually gets compromised big time at a show because of the room.

Well, the rear wave is highly compromised by the panel shape. It sounds like a horribly muffled loudspeaker behind it. That sound then comes back reflecting at you with a delay. The brain usually ignores these secondary events as being redundant but only if they are similar. The back wave of the ML is not similar. So if I were anyone using them, I would absorb the heck out of the back reflection. But then again that may take away some of their dipole sound, I don't know .

At the show there was fair amount of rear wall absorption:

On second thought, that absorber is not tall enough. The curtain though should be a very good mid to high frequency absorber across the whole back wall.

 

[amirm]

Amir , thanks for the in depth feedback . Lovely read and great pics . The Neoliths sounded good to me at last years Munich show ,with much humbler gear from Moon Audio . It was a fresh , out the box panel . No where near burnt in , but there was no denying their potential . Would luv to hear in a more controlled environment .

You should consider my views as someone skeptical going to listen to them . Others will walk away more impressed and give it more benefit of doubt.

 

[bonzo75]

In fact this is exactly one of the problems I was referring to. Absorption also deadens the rear wave. I think a flat even surface odds important for a panel.

 

[Argonaut]

Are Pointless.

Referencing post #49,
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?19472-GPA-announce-Monaco-2-0&p=367857#post367857

From "Was not a fan of the sound of the system" Are we to conclude that Wilson, VTL, GPA, etc,etc, are also somewhat poor examples of the art!

 

[RayDunzl]

I'm looking at my impulse response, and come to this conclusion.

The backwave bounce off even a flat backwall is dispersed, and not a defined echo. The 30 degree arc may spread the direction, and the toe-in angle sends much of the wave bounce more toward the sidewall and not directly back at the listener. So the direct wave is intense, and the delayed wave is dispersed and directed away from the main listening position.



The hash around 1ms would be bounces off the couch - the microphone is at ear position, on a deskstand on the back of the couch leaning forward.

The diffuse echo at 7~9ms is the bounce off the wall behind the speakers.

There are no wall/floor/ceiling bounces visible.

Increasing the time:



There's a more defined looking bounce at 27ms, which would be from speaker to wall behind and above the microphone back down the room to the wall behind the speaker and then back to the microphone, with the same bounce of the dispersed backwave at around 33ms.

There's rockwool (up to 4ft high) behind the mic, so no bounce off the wall behind the listening position at listening height, but it does bounce off the wall above that.

Note there are no (that I can see) wall/floor/ceiling reflections of consequence.

Here's an Infinity P-363 standing directly in front of the left reQuest:



Similar, but maybe more early reflections.

 

[ack]

Yes I follow ack's post, as he is a classical, spectral, and Logan lover. I should check his system once, will learn a few things.

If you are ever in Boston feel free to knock on the door. I would LOVE to talk about all your live-concert experiences, and get your feedback on the system sound (I never run demos to actually showcase the gear, I am more interested in people's opinions, so I kinda set up "traps" once in a while - LOL)! Since Peter's and Al's last visit, I have adjusted toe-in at their suggestion. I try to follow the 1/3 ML rule, but it's hard to get good bass at the same time; I think I nailed it this time, but it did require more crossover modifications, chucked the "audiophile" fuses, and I am still experimenting... My wife is sick and tired of me with the soldering gun in my hands all the time

 

[thedudeabides]

Having owned five different panel speakers over some 30 years plus, they can sound anywhere from awful to amazing depending on gear, room, and set up.

I totally agree with Kedar. They are very labor intensive and do take a significant amounts of time and experimentation to optimize.

And the way a panel "energizes" a room is entirely different than a dynamic / cone speaker.

 

[sbo6]

Thanks Amir, your feedback is what I'd expect wrt vibrations. I had Summits and at moderate levels the bass cabinet resonated significantly (easily felt touching the side cabinet). I thought for 15K this shouldn't occur but they use 3/4" MDF for the cab and a 5/8" MDF board to separate both woofers, ridiculously cheesy IMO. Seems the Neoliths are glorified Summits...

Also, having owned several MLs, toe-in optimization via 1/3 light trick gets you 95% there, so I would cross that off the list as a reason for poor performance.

 

[Argonaut]

To what exactly do you ascribe the fundamentals of Martin Logan's appalling sonic performance then sbo6 ?

Why did you purchase them in the first place if they are so shoddy?

What transducers have you replaced your previous mistake with ?

Do you know your own mind ???

 

[sbo6]

To what exactly do you ascribe the fundamentals of Martin Logan's appalling sonic performance then sbo6 ?

Why did you purchase them in the first place if they are so shoddy?

What transducers have you replaced your previous mistake with ?

Do you know your own mind ???

Harlequin, I never said MLs had appalling sonic performance, I said the bass cabinets vibrated ridiculously. I loved my Summits and SL3s when I had them, what they do well, they do very well..

When I purchased them, I didn't check for any structural deficiencies, who knows all speakers' problems until you buy them and try them?

They have been replaced with Usher BE20Ds, which IMO are levels better. Of course, they are significantly more $ so they should be.

 

[TitaniumTroy]

Amir, thanks for taking the time to do such a lengthy report on the Neolith's. Hope you can do a similar report on Magnepan's 3.7s or better yet 20.7s someday. I am a long time Maggie fan and would like to know what your impressions on what it does well or not. I know the resonances bugaboo will come up, but I can take the truth. Or perhaps you can listen to a pair with after market Magnestands, which are a steel braced frame that helps stop some of those vibrations.

I was very impressed with the Neolith's at AXPONA 2015, then I heard them at a ML dealer in Chicago. Becoming less impressed, though I did like the big panel more than the CLX's. My preference in the high frequency is a ribbon tweeter, I also thought the bass was not as well intergrated as say Sanders Hybrid ESL's. Or the dipolar bass of 20.7's, which I was very impressed with recently at a Maggie dealer, made my 3.6's sound weak.

In the corners of my room behind my speakers, I have QRD diffusors and then tri-corner bass traps behind them. Then more diffusors to the right and left of the corner. I think using absorption and diffusion works best.