Is Pass Labs/Martin Logan a good match?

[Big Dog RJ]

Now that captured my attention!

G'day Romaz,
I find your post very interesting indeed and have some questions:

1. On the Ren15a they are fitted with built in high powered bass drivers, capable of delivering well over 500w of class D power. Why on earth would you need so much power on the panels?

2. The efficiency on the whole speaker itself is well over 90dB! My initial experience with this series listening extensively to a chaps Ren 15a's over here, driven with a high powered CJ amplifier, is too much (classic 120). The room is not suited for such power and completely over-energizes the room. Later on he used the ARC software to a great affect but still has issues... Hence, has downsized to the Classic 60se, which is the same power amp I'm using on my Ethos.
Question is: to acquire this much power, is your room massive?

3. I have a good close mate who is driving his CLX's with just the XA30.8 driven full range! No subs, no added power amps, monoblocks or any gizmos, just a stand alone stereo amp and it is just superb! There is nothing short of a marvelous performance not only in sound, but also in sheer transparency, totally natural timbre & tone, and most of all musicality. Although not comparable to what I currently have, I am totally satisfied with what the classic 60se can deliver through the Ethos with 250w of built in class D power plus DSP and all the added goodies from Martin Logan's proprietary design.
Hence, my final question: are you trying to achieve an artificial impact and not allowing the Stats to reproduce sound & tonality in its more pure and true form? (which as you know the Ren 15a can reproduce beautifully!)

I don't currently own these stats nor have lived with them in large rooms but the use of 300w of class A power by the legend Nelson Pass seems excessive to me.

Sorry, if I'm coming across as arrogant or rude. That's certainly not my intention. It's just that I absolutely love these stats and was planning to end up with the CLX's! However, after careful and extensive sessions with the Ren15a, now I'm enjoying my humble Ethos and will decide a bit later...

I'm trying to understand why you would require this much power?

These two types of stats cost an awful lot in Aussie land, (in excess of 40 grand!) and therefore one of these will be my final speakers. I'm just now wondering which one...
What's your advice mate?

Cheers RJ

 

[romaz]

Now that captured my attention!

G'day Romaz,
I find your post very interesting indeed and have some questions:

1. On the Ren15a they are fitted with built in high powered bass drivers, capable of delivering well over 500w of class D power. Why on earth would you need so much power on the panels?

2. The efficiency on the whole speaker itself is well over 90dB! My initial experience with this series listening extensively to a chaps Ren 15a's over here, driven with a high powered CJ amplifier, is too much (classic 120). The room is not suited for such power and completely over-energizes the room. Later on he used the ARC software to a great affect but still has issues... Hence, has downsized to the Classic 60se, which is the same power amp I'm using on my Ethos.
Question is: to acquire this much power, is your room massive?

3. I have a good close mate who is driving his CLX's with just the XA30.8 driven full range! No subs, no added power amps, monoblocks or any gizmos, just a stand alone stereo amp and it is just superb! There is nothing short of a marvelous performance not only in sound, but also in sheer transparency, totally natural timbre & tone, and most of all musicality. Although not comparable to what I currently have, I am totally satisfied with what the classic 60se can deliver through the Ethos with 250w of built in class D power plus DSP and all the added goodies from Martin Logan's proprietary design.
Hence, my final question: are you trying to achieve an artificial impact and not allowing the Stats to reproduce sound & tonality in its more pure and true form? (which as you know the Ren 15a can reproduce beautifully!)

I don't currently own these stats nor have lived with them in large rooms but the use of 300w of class A power by the legend Nelson Pass seems excessive to me.

Sorry, if I'm coming across as arrogant or rude. That's certainly not my intention. It's just that I absolutely love these stats and was planning to end up with the CLX's! However, after careful and extensive sessions with the Ren15a, now I'm enjoying my humble Ethos and will decide a bit later...

I'm trying to understand why you would require this much power?

These two types of stats cost an awful lot in Aussie land, (in excess of 40 grand!) and therefore one of these will be my final speakers. I'm just now wondering which one...
What's your advice mate?

Cheers RJ

Hi RJ,

My journey with the ML Renaissance 15A has been a challenging one to the extent that I almost gave them up. In the end, it came down to proper amplification and I'll do my best to explain.

In my home, I have 2 listening rooms. In my moderate-sized home office, I have a pair of custom Voxativs in a near field configuration that are driven beautifully with just 2 watts of amplification. Combined with a JL Audio subwoofer, this setup is wonderful for intimate vocals and small ensemble classical and jazz. For this type of music, I couldn't ask for better as these single-driver Voxativs are capable of expressing exquisite detail layers with wonderfully rich textures and the most subtle nuances.

Where this setup is less credible is with large orchestral music or heavily amplified music, especially during those times when I am looking for a scale performance at reference volume levels. For this type of music, I prefer to listen in my large listening room that happens to double as my home theater. This room is large enough (30 feet wide, 24 feet deep with 16 foot high cathedral ceilings) that it could accommodate almost any size of speaker. I eventually settled on the ML Renaissance 15As after hearing them driven very convincingly by a D'Agostino Progression stereo amp (300w into 8 ohms) at RMAF last year. As I reviewed my notes from that show, I commented on the giant sound stage these speakers cast as well as the tremendous bass. To not have to use separate subwoofers in my large listening room was a real plus.

When my ML Ren15As finally arrived to my home, I had some mixed feelings about how they sounded but mostly, I was underwhelmed. Before I describe what I mean by this, I need to first discuss my amplification choice. While I liked what I heard with the D'Agostino Progression, this amp is not easy for me to audition where I live and so I started off with a Pass Labs XA30.8 that I borrowed from a friend. At only 30w into 8 ohms and 60w into 4 ohms, this doesn't sound like much, however, as you've stated, the ML Ren15A are 92dB sensitive and so this amp was capable of driving the Ren15A to pretty loud levels. This amp beautifully exhibited that evocative Pass Labs tone with wonderful midrange bloom and a very airy treble. The problem with this amp is that I found bass response (even with the Ren15A's powered subs) to be underwhelming. Not only was the impact soft but it was loose and not well defined. More importantly, transients at all frequencies seemed slow and dulled and the image sounded too diffuse. While the XA30.8 might be adequate for Diana Krall, it just didn't cut it for Mahler's 8th.

Someone suggested that I try the Pass Labs XA60.8 monoblocks and these paired better with the Ren15As in my large room. A touch less sweetness but better drive and more headroom, however, it still sounded too soft for my liking and bass was still underwhelming to the extent that I felt I needed to supplement the Ren15As with a separate subwoofer. Also, the image still sounded too diffuse. I was beginning to think that either Pass Labs amps were not a good fit for the Ren15A or I was better off with point source speakers rather than these softly imaging electrostats.

From here, I decided to give class D a try and I was able to audition a pair of Merrill Thor (200w into 8 ohms) and then a pair of Merrill Veritas (400w into 8 ohms). The Merrill Veritas especially was capable of things that neither of the Pass Labs amps could do. Dynamics were much improved and as good as I remember with the D'Agostino amp. Bass was prodigious, more extended, and much better controlled to the extent that I no longer had to use my separate subwoofer. What people need to understand is that the Merrill Veritas sounded more dynamic then either of the 2 Pass Labs amps at both low listening levels and at high listening levels. Even at low listening levels, it was easy to hear the superior dynamic contrasts and the better bass control. You might think I'm a basshead and I'm not but because organ music is among the things I really enjoy listening to, bass dynamics is very important. Where the Merrill amps underwhelmed was with tone. In comparison to either of the Pass Labs amps, both Merrill amps sounded sterile and less involving. The sound stage was flatter, there was less air around voices and instruments and decay trails were notably truncated. I don't know if this is a class A vs class D thing but there was no way I could be happy with either Merrill amp.

After visiting dealerships and the homes of fellow audiophiles who owned either the ML 15A or 13A, I was able to also hear other amps including a Luxman M-900u, Constellation Centaur II, and the Burmester 911 Mk3. Of these amps, the Burmester was my favorite. Especially in monoblock configuration, there was plenty of dynamic grip and authority but what set these monoblocks apart were the very fast transients resulting in remarkable transparency. At nearly $70k for a pair, I struggled to justify this level of expense largely because they lacked a certain musical refinement that thus far, I have only heard with tubes or with Pass Labs amps. Because tubes are not practical for me in this room and because tubes generally cannot provide the same level of dynamics and control as solid state, I decided to explore my Pass Labs options one last time.

After speaking with Mark at Reno HiFi, he told me he wasn't surprised by my observations with either the XA30.8 or XA60.8 in my system and strongly suggested that I give the XA100.8 or the X350.8 a try since both amps had considerably more grunt than either the XA30.8 or XA60.8. Well, Mark was right and the X350.8 especially was a great fit. While the transients aren't quite to the level of the Burmester, the X350.8 comes very close. Especially when paired with Pass Labs' XP-22 preamp, dynamic contrasts are simply incredible with tremendous bass weight, definition and control even at low listening levels. Best of all, that beautiful Pass Labs tone is all there.

My point with my original post is that not all Pass Labs amps sound the same. Some Pass Labs amps are definitely soft but others are much more incisive, detailed and hit harder. Based on what I am told, the much more expensive Pass Labs Xs amps take these qualities even further. In response to your question, power output is one parameter but ultimately, it is not the sole determinant for how an amp will sound and how well that amp will pair with a certain speaker. Sometimes, you get more responsiveness and control from a higher power amp even if you only ever utilize a small fraction of your amp's power output capabilities. What I have found amazing with the X350.8 is that it has all the dynamic gravitas one would expect from a 350 watt amplifier but also the detail delicacy one might expect from a low power SET and the Ren15A is so resolving and so transparent that it reveals these qualities beautifully.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Nice one Romaz!

I read your reply with much enthusiasm and learnt quite a lot from your post.

OK, now I understand your choice and selection of power amps. Yes, agreed on the power output, as it doesn't evaluate the true quality of power amplification. As you well know with stats it is that impedance curve that is critical to control and some power amps just cannot deliver that extra juice/stable current. However, the ones that can, really deliver all the glory like no other!

The Pass Labs XS series is top notch quality, probably one of the best in terms of Class A topology at its finest but does come at a pretty penny...

I sincerely think the X350.8's will give you many decades of musical bliss! I can certainly imagine how this sounds and launches that musical wave into your large room. The one and only chap I know of who has the Ren15a's down under definitely does not have the room size as yours. Hence, everything seemed over-energized at his place... Now with the CJ tube amp driving them is just glorious and I absolutely love the sound and music.

Each time I do venture out and listen to either the CLX's or Ren15's gets me all excited like a little kid in a shop

I'm still wondering if it should be the CLX's or Ren15's... Perhaps it all depends on room size and placement and obviously the amount set aside to pay for all this! No point stressing, I'll give it plenty of time... And just enjoy what we have at the moment.
Enjoy Romaz, wish I could have heard your system in person and taken some notes, must be one hec of an experience and a musical one indeed!

Cheers mate, RJ

 

[krelldog]

I have the Martin Logan Montis's paired with a Pass Int 60....The sound is wonderful..full...detailed and most importantly very musical. I'm extremely happy with the match.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

INT60 another marvelous amp from the legend!

I have the Martin Logan Montis's paired with a Pass Int 60....The sound is wonderful..full...detailed and most importantly very musical. I'm extremely happy with the match.

G'day Krelldog,
I meant to reply much earlier but never got the chance until now.
I heard this amp with the ML's and it was indeed a wonderful sound! It was nearly tube like in quality with an added muscle factor of solid state power. I was told the INT60 is basically the XA30.8 built in as an integrated but I sincerely think it's far more than that.

I was nearly going to finalize on this amp but somehow managed to hold back as my ultimate passion was set on a pair of CJ monoblocks. The INT60 was also costing quite a fair bit more but I was ready to put down that extra . However, some other voice told me that if and when I venture towards either the CLX's or Ren15a, the CJ monoblocks would suit better in the long run, so I waited patiently...

If I did have the means for a second wonderful system with a choice of integrated amps to suit both tube and SS, it would be the CJ CAV45 and the INT60, they are truly marvelous designs that deliver the best in musicality, regardless of price.

Enjoy that INT60 to the fullest, with your ML's I really can see how much you are actually loving it!
Cheers mate, RJ

 

[bonzo75]

G'day mate, from down unda;

Unda in Hindi and Marathi means egg. And I just cooked Unda curry, using desiccated coconut for the masala, Goan style

 

[awsmone]

Looks very good ...yum, damn cold here and this would warm us up

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Oh my! That looks fabulous!
How Many eggs in there Bonz? Are you going to eat all of that... at least think of us humble folk when doing so.

Remember to workout after all those eggs, too much colestral can clog the arteries... however with a gym session, you'll be able to do some heavy lifting, especially after eggs. I've noticed it helps a lot!

Cheers mate, enjoy that fine curry!
RJ

 

[Henry B from Oregon]

I know I'm adding to an old post but hoping I can still get some replies. I'm new to the Forum and not quite sure how everything works, but have been impressed with the answers people have provided to questions. So here goes...

I have a similar question about replacing amplification for ML speakers. When I first built my system, around 2000 (yes, I'm old), I paired ML ReQuest speakers with 'bulletproof' Classe CA 150 amplification and a CP-50 preamp. I auditioned lots of speakers and fell in love with the ML imaging, with unmatched detail and smoothness in the midrange and a top end sparkle that was just magical to my ears. They didn't have the slam of Aerials or Wilsons. The Kefs of the day were well integrated but lacked the top end detail I loved. etc, etc, etc

After deciding on my speakers I set about looking at other amplification beyond the Classe solid state amps I used in the audition. I had tried other options of that era and found Krells too 'brittle' for my taste, CJs (they were a hybrid of tubes and transistors that I tried) were very smooth but lacking in the upper end detail I associated with electrostats, McIntosh was a poor fit - muddy and lacking the detail/upper end magic, and on and on. So ML and Classe it was to be.

I also found that while the ML hybrids may not require huge current reserves to have sold me, they really started to sing when I bridged the original CA 150 (now effectively a 300 w monoblock) and added a second in this same configuration for 300 wpc of high current 'headroom'. I lived in sonic bliss for 15 years. But somewhere around 2016 or 17, I think, I had a little cash to burn and I traded the ReQuests in as a down payment on a pair of CLX Arts complete with the crossover chip for my Descent i subwoofer. As others on the forum have mentioned, they're wonderful speakers with seamless integration across a wide frequency range and a fitting upgrade to my beloved ReQuests. I found they also really performed at their best with plenty of amplifier current in reserve, with the old CA 150 'monoblocks' out-performing (to my ears) several 150 - 200 watt monoblocks at the store. I've been loving life ever since.

Sadly, after "only" 25 years I now find myself needing to look for modern amplification that will still preserve the detail (without grit) and seemingly unlimited sparkle on top that the vintage Classe/ML pairing has always brought me with these speakers.

Some of the previous responses on this subject have suggested the Pass Labs options are a good match. But all the comments I've seen are from the 2016 -2018 era and I'm wondering 1) if the PL amps of today are still likely to give me a good match for my CLX Arts, 2) if they're likely to have similar sonic 'character' to my old Classe amplification (I'm under no illusion they were completely 'color free', but I loved the sound) and 3) if there are other options I should look into. Some experience-based opinions will be greately appreciated since, in 2020, I semi-retired from the mid-Atlantic, where I had been treated very well by Overture Audio/Video, to the very rural Oregon coast where life is good and scenery is unmatched but high-end audio is many hours away!

Thanks in advance for any help,
Henry

 

[Big Dog RJ]

G'day Henry, greetings from Down Unda.

Ah! Great to come across another ML owner, and especially CLX's!!! WOOF!

Certainly sounds like you've used quite a number of SS amplifiers and would like to continue to do so... that's fine! That's your preference.

Can also recommend these ones, I've tried them both at home trials and in private demos: (no particular order of preference, all were mighty fine!)
1 Pass Labs XA60.8, XA100.8 and XA160.8
(A very good mate of mine uses the XA30.8 on his CLX's with great success, superb!). Nothing lacking at all. Note: I've specifically stated the XA series, sole reason being it's high Class A bias operation, gives far better drive, control and grip on the CLX's full range. The XA series are phenomenal gear, really top notch designs by Nelson Pass, the legend!

2. Classe' Delta monoblocks: beautiful sound and drives CLX's supremely well. These latest gear from Classe' are made in just two versions. The stereo version and in monoblocks. The Delta series have solid well built power supplies, similar to Pass Labs but mostly run in Class AB.

3. Up the ante a bit plus the pricing: Dan D's Momentums: fantastic old school Krell design, with a top notch layout redone by Agostino's team. Marvellous gear, both versions stereo and monoblocks are tops! However, these were matched with the Momentum preamp, and so quite a hefty price tag but damn beautiful!

4. Up that level a bit more: Dan D's Relentless monoblocks: these are extreme power houses, capable of 100w pure Class all the way, doesn't flinch one bit! Starts at something like 600w at 8 Ohms, 1200w at 4 Ohms & 3000w at 2 Ohms... capable of launching the next mission to the moon! Such power is not needed at all but if you're keen on a container load of extra headroom, very highly stable voltages and massive current reserves, these are the ones if I were to divulge in such spend.

5. The Dartzeel monoblocks: these are just a beautiful thing! Extremely well built with Swiss finesse from top to bottom! Cost a bloody fortune, similar pricing to the Relentless amps, both very high performance gear and very well suited to match with CLX's that are of course high performance speakers. Or should I say, high performance Stats.

These are my top five in SS design, I've tried and auditioned many others... but these are the list of my top from 10 or 19 that I've experienced in the last few years since 2019.

With reference to tube gear, yes not all tube gear can drive these stats optimally. Ones that I've owned in the past, ARC, VTL and Manley Labs have always been fantastic! These were not hybrids, rather all tooob design and plenty of power, so stable voltage and high current wasn't an issue. Power ratings were typically from 250w upwards, the last ones being the VTL Wotans, which were around 1000w (kick of a mule!)

In the past, since I was introduced to CJ during my teens, I ended up running a dealership network spanning the Sth East Asian region, and our prime tube gear was CJ, although we sold many others as mentioned above. So now, still to this day, I use exclusively CJ to drive my CLX's but I make sure they're all tube design and being monoblocks, there's far less stress on the tubes since each amplifier is driving only one speaker. Also amplifiers of this tube nature can have their Output tubes lifespan shorten if over driven. Therefore, with monoblocks, since they have dedicated power supplies dedicated towards driving just one channel, makes the equation of driving optimally far more simple. Anyway, this is just my personal preference, so I won't go into tooobs too much. OTOH, in time to come, I will be going for a SS design, either stereo or monoblocks, and currently the Pass Labs XA series is at the top of my list.

You did mention briefly that you've tried a hybrid version of CJ... perhaps it was the ET250S? Now, that particular amplifier is not a good match for difficult loads, especially electrostats. I've had similar issues with the ET250S driving my previous Quad ESL's, not that great at all. CJ had another older hybrid design, the Evo- 2000, now that's a very different type of hybrid. Massive power supplies and no issues driving notorious impedence swings. No longer in production, vintage gear. However, these SS ones I've owned previously by CJ and they're awesome with Stats: Premier 350 and MF2550SE. No longer in production though and parts are very hard to find, CJ doesn't support these models any longer since their primary focus is on tube gear now.

That's about it! Hope that helps. Here's a pic of my humble rig, awesome blossom. There's no other speaker system I'd rather own regardless of price.

Woofty woof'n!
Cheers, and enjoy those finest tunes!
RJ

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Was trying to attach a pic but says too large... I'll try this one.

 

[Henry B from Oregon]

Thanks so much, RJ

I appreciate the thoughtful response with your advantage of such extensive listening. I will absolutely find a way to audition the Pass XA and Classe amplification. I think the others are outside my price zone but well worth listening to if convenient while I'm looking at the other two.

I know that Pass has been around awhile and can service what they sell (at least for the next decade). I'm less sure about Classe. I certainly can't complain about a 25 year service life for the older Classe amplifiers, but I skipped over my interim experience with the home theater side of my system where I 'lost' two preamp/processors within 5 years and a three channel amp for centers/surrounds, after about 20. By then Classe was not the same company it was at the turn of the century, having been bought and sold several times, as I recall. They no longer serviced even five year old equipment, much less the vintage 2000 electronics which were, incidentally, originally sold with a lifetime warranty! For the theater side I just threw up my arms and went for an Anthem mid-fi preamp/processor and their three channel amp which have turned out to be quite serviceable. But two-channel listening is more demanding than theater, at least for me. I've read that the new Classe is sticking closer to their roots of amplification, but I'm still wondering about long-term durability since, as you can see, I'm not one to constantly tweak my system. But they're certainly worth the audition.

I wish I could remember what the CJ amplifier was that I auditioned with the ReQuests. But it's been too long ago. Although I can tell you my first serious system bought in 1977 was built around a pair of Dahlquist DQ-10s with matched subwoofer and Great American Sound amplification (Ampzilla power amp and Thoebe preamp)! So I do love my midrange and imaging!

When I upgraded in 2000 I did end up 'sweetening' the input side by investing in a CAL CD player (actually a 5 disc changer) and a CAL Alpha tube dac which I used for a long time. I had settled on Sovtek tubes for it and enjoyed it for many years. So I'm not adverse to the tube sound. However, I did replace the Alpha with a lightly used Classe DAC-1 which I still use to this day.

Your humble system is anything but, in my estimation! It looks thoroughly enjoyable I've attached one of mine, although the wide angle lens has distorted the toe-in of the speakers pretty significantly! I did end up with a smaller listening room/theater when we moved to Oregon, but it's still highly enjoyable

Thanks again, and all the best,
Henry

 

[Henry B from Oregon]

I also got an error message on that so have included the photos in a compressed pdf. Hopefully that works ok.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Ah! Nice one Henry mate, looks fab!

CLX Art's are a work of Art! Nothing else. I've never been this passionate about any other type of speaker system, and I've been through an awful lot! If memory serves... (Bose901S-6, Mission 753, Paradigm Studio 80&100, Energy Veritas V2.3, Genesis 500, Theil CS7, Infinity IRS-1B, Epsilon & Ren90, Maggie's: MG3A, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, & MG20.2, Quads: ESL63, 989, 2905 & 2912, and ML stats: CLSIIz, SL3, Ethos, Montis, Summit-X and now the CLX's). These are the primary speakers I used in our personal system over the years of my short dealership stint. There were a number of other brands and models that we sold across the region but these were the most memorable ones. Of course various kinds of gear also passed through, NAD, Musical Fidelity, Carver, Harmon Kardon, Threshold, Forte, Krell, Bryston, Parasound, Anthem, Quad, ARC, Audio Note, Sonic Frontiers, Golden Tube Audio and CJ. Whenever I visit Spore or HK and meet up with my old dealer mates, we have a good laugh over coffee's and beer and still one of us manages to spill coffee onto our shirts, bunch of old geezers. Oh man, those were the glory days. Anyway, we're all done and dusted with this high-end madness... there's simply no end to it! Now, we just all relax, sit back and enjoy those fine tunes!

Thanks for sharing the info on Classe' gear. I was aware that they had changed hands but wasn't aware of the change in their service standards. Oh well, I guess we can't have good things last forever can we? The same goes for many of those brands I've used and currently using. Some of the service tech has slumped, as a result I've found my trusted techie who looks after all my modded CJ gear, and of course we have a very good importer & service agent for ML & Esoteric in Aus, extremely pleased with their customer support. Really tops!

Yes, those other makes I mentioned, Dan D's designs and the Dartzeel gear are fabulous and so are their price tags! Definitely not necessary to engage in this kind of spend to acquire high quality sound. However, once in a while it's just nice to experience this level of fine performance on another dimension! Just once.

There's another one that does come to mind, which I really enjoyed my time with; Burmester. I home trialed an integrated amp 032 and the 911 power amp. They were really good! Truly tops but the only set back for me is that Burmester accepts only XLR type of connections, no SE/RCA type at all. Very Similar to Gryphon gear... so due to this aspect, I'm not willing to change connections just because. Also I prefer to use SE type connections. I have no such desire or interest in XLR. Just my preference, that's all.
If XLR is not an issue for your particular system installation, and if possible also give Burmester an audition. You may actually like it and what it does with CLX's. It was worth bringing these two units on home trial.

Do let us know how it goes, and take your time because the CLX's deserve the best! Then you might as well just sit back and enjoy those finest tunes!
WOOF! RJ

 

[Hear Here]

Hi RJ,

My journey with the ML Renaissance 15A has been a challenging one to the extent that I almost gave them up. In the end, it came down to proper amplification and I'll do my best to explain.

In my home, I have 2 listening rooms. In my moderate-sized home office, I have a pair of custom Voxativs in a near field configuration that are driven beautifully with just 2 watts of amplification. Combined with a JL Audio subwoofer, this setup is wonderful for intimate vocals and small ensemble classical and jazz. For this type of music, I couldn't ask for better as these single-driver Voxativs are capable of expressing exquisite detail layers with wonderfully rich textures and the most subtle nuances.

Where this setup is less credible is with large orchestral music or heavily amplified music, especially during those times when I am looking for a scale performance at reference volume levels. For this type of music, I prefer to listen in my large listening room that happens to double as my home theater. This room is large enough (30 feet wide, 24 feet deep with 16 foot high cathedral ceilings) that it could accommodate almost any size of speaker. I eventually settled on the ML Renaissance 15As after hearing them driven very convincingly by a D'Agostino Progression stereo amp (300w into 8 ohms) at RMAF last year. As I reviewed my notes from that show, I commented on the giant sound stage these speakers cast as well as the tremendous bass. To not have to use separate subwoofers in my large listening room was a real plus.

When my ML Ren15As finally arrived to my home, I had some mixed feelings about how they sounded but mostly, I was underwhelmed. Before I describe what I mean by this, I need to first discuss my amplification choice. While I liked what I heard with the D'Agostino Progression, this amp is not easy for me to audition where I live and so I started off with a Pass Labs XA30.8 that I borrowed from a friend. At only 30w into 8 ohms and 60w into 4 ohms, this doesn't sound like much, however, as you've stated, the ML Ren15A are 92dB sensitive and so this amp was capable of driving the Ren15A to pretty loud levels. This amp beautifully exhibited that evocative Pass Labs tone with wonderful midrange bloom and a very airy treble. The problem with this amp is that I found bass response (even with the Ren15A's powered subs) to be underwhelming. Not only was the impact soft but it was loose and not well defined. More importantly, transients at all frequencies seemed slow and dulled and the image sounded too diffuse. While the XA30.8 might be adequate for Diana Krall, it just didn't cut it for Mahler's 8th.

Someone suggested that I try the Pass Labs XA60.8 monoblocks and these paired better with the Ren15As in my large room. A touch less sweetness but better drive and more headroom, however, it still sounded too soft for my liking and bass was still underwhelming to the extent that I felt I needed to supplement the Ren15As with a separate subwoofer. Also, the image still sounded too diffuse. I was beginning to think that either Pass Labs amps were not a good fit for the Ren15A or I was better off with point source speakers rather than these softly imaging electrostats.

From here, I decided to give class D a try and I was able to audition a pair of Merrill Thor (200w into 8 ohms) and then a pair of Merrill Veritas (400w into 8 ohms). The Merrill Veritas especially was capable of things that neither of the Pass Labs amps could do. Dynamics were much improved and as good as I remember with the D'Agostino amp. Bass was prodigious, more extended, and much better controlled to the extent that I no longer had to use my separate subwoofer. What people need to understand is that the Merrill Veritas sounded more dynamic then either of the 2 Pass Labs amps at both low listening levels and at high listening levels. Even at low listening levels, it was easy to hear the superior dynamic contrasts and the better bass control. You might think I'm a basshead and I'm not but because organ music is among the things I really enjoy listening to, bass dynamics is very important. Where the Merrill amps underwhelmed was with tone. In comparison to either of the Pass Labs amps, both Merrill amps sounded sterile and less involving. The sound stage was flatter, there was less air around voices and instruments and decay trails were notably truncated. I don't know if this is a class A vs class D thing but there was no way I could be happy with either Merrill amp.

After visiting dealerships and the homes of fellow audiophiles who owned either the ML 15A or 13A, I was able to also hear other amps including a Luxman M-900u, Constellation Centaur II, and the Burmester 911 Mk3. Of these amps, the Burmester was my favorite. Especially in monoblock configuration, there was plenty of dynamic grip and authority but what set these monoblocks apart were the very fast transients resulting in remarkable transparency. At nearly $70k for a pair, I struggled to justify this level of expense largely because they lacked a certain musical refinement that thus far, I have only heard with tubes or with Pass Labs amps. Because tubes are not practical for me in this room and because tubes generally cannot provide the same level of dynamics and control as solid state, I decided to explore my Pass Labs options one last time.

After speaking with Mark at Reno HiFi, he told me he wasn't surprised by my observations with either the XA30.8 or XA60.8 in my system and strongly suggested that I give the XA100.8 or the X350.8 a try since both amps had considerably more grunt than either the XA30.8 or XA60.8. Well, Mark was right and the X350.8 especially was a great fit. While the transients aren't quite to the level of the Burmester, the X350.8 comes very close. Especially when paired with Pass Labs' XP-22 preamp, dynamic contrasts are simply incredible with tremendous bass weight, definition and control even at low listening levels. Best of all, that beautiful Pass Labs tone is all there.

My point with my original post is that not all Pass Labs amps sound the same. Some Pass Labs amps are definitely soft but others are much more incisive, detailed and hit harder. Based on what I am told, the much more expensive Pass Labs Xs amps take these qualities even further. In response to your question, power output is one parameter but ultimately, it is not the sole determinant for how an amp will sound and how well that amp will pair with a certain speaker. Sometimes, you get more responsiveness and control from a higher power amp even if you only ever utilize a small fraction of your amp's power output capabilities. What I have found amazing with the X350.8 is that it has all the dynamic gravitas one would expect from a 350 watt amplifier but also the detail delicacy one might expect from a low power SET and the Ren15A is so resolving and so transparent that it reveals these qualities beautifully.

My experience very much matches yours, but I did give up on my 13A Expressions, though perhaps for other reasons.

I'd been using Avantgarde horn speakers for many years but, after listening to a friend's excellent QUAD-based system, I though I should look at electrostatics to replace the ageing AGs. I researched and concluded the 13As would be ideal as they were very well reviewed and are narrow and semi-transparent, so would not seriously impede the views from the windows behind the speakers too much. I auditioned in a dealer's showroom and was encouraged enough to buy them.

My SET amps were not suitable, so I bought an amp that was highly praised on the ML owners' site - the Sanders Magtech - the one amp claimed to be designed specifically for electrostatic speakers.

Now I had the speakers and the amp that should be a great match. However, I was guilty of the cardinal sin of buying without a home demo first!

The speakers sounded mediocre, despite the efforts of Anthem DSP and help from the UK distributor who visited to help set them up. I persevered, but they never sounded even as good as the old AG Unos. After further investigation, I concluded that it wasn't the match with amp that was the problem, but the match with my particular room. My very large, almost semi-circular room demands that the speakers are placed mid-room with one speaker 12 ft from the "wall" behind, while the other is 15 ft behind. This "wall" is floor-to-ceiling glass that curves around behind the speakers. No problem with the horns, but a disaster for the MLs. Half the MLs' energy is projected backwards and they require a wall behind to harvest some of this energy. In my room, this wasn't possible so, much as I tried, they never sounded as good as the AGs, The MLs were sold and I upgraded from Unos to Duo XDs. MLs need a wall about 5 ft behind them to perform at the best.

So, my advice would be to insist on a home demo of the ML speakers (well, any costly speaker in fact) and try with the Pass Labs - but expect this amp to be inadequate in view of the low sensitivity of els speakers. Consider the Sanders amp, but as suggested by others, I'd now look at a good Class D amp, such as the NAD M32 or the M33 if you wanted an all-in-one that also featured the arguably best Class D technology - Purifi Eligentakt. T+A also offer a premium Eigentakt amp, but I'd avoid the "garage-built" ones featuring the basic Purifi EVAL board and sold direct or on Ebay. Good luck

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Yes HH, I recall your room! No good for dipoles at all. They require proper setup and most importantly back walls / front and bit of sides, although sides hardly affect them. Ceilings and floors not so critical but proper setup will create their magic. No compromises with these stats.

The post above on the Pass Labs range... yes very true. Not all Pass Labs are designed the same and they vary quite drastically from series to series. The top of the line, XS300 I heard with some incredible Zelaton's, holy smacker-roons!!!

Anyway, each person will have their preferences and their tastes vary, just like food. Most importantly though, apart from the lofty gear, which sky's the limit, really speaking, I've found the room to play a massive factor in any setup worthwhile doing. You can spend over a million bucks on gear, speakers and accessories but if the room is shabby, it's always a half baked cake. Then again some like sushi, raw sushi sushi!!!

Cheers maties, and most of all, do enjoy those finest tunes!
Woof! RJ

 

[Hear Here]

Yes HH, I recall your room! No good for dipoles at all. They require proper setup and most importantly back walls / front and bit of sides, although sides hardly affect them. Ceilings and floors not so critical but proper setup will create their magic. No compromises with these stats.

The really odd thing is that, before going for the Martin Logans and on the strength of my friend's QUAD-based system, I had earlier purchased a pair of used 2905 /2912 Quads. In my room, they sounded remarkably good and it was this experience that led me to believe the MLs would be equally happy.

So, the question is - why did the Quads perform well, whereas the MLs, placed in the same room, perform so poorly?

Certainly the room's features explain why MLs sounded poor, but why not the Quads, equally so? I'm still pondering these illogical findings!

Any ideas? Thanks

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Attn: HH

Ah! The infamous Quads! What other Stats gain so much recognition for their rich history, and yet absolutely shabby quality control in their later models coming out of the "certified" Chinese factory, absolute disaster!

During Peter Walker's time, those were my favourite ESL's of all time! After he passed away, that legendary vision of fine Electrostats was long gone, and the moment they were bought over by IAG and production commenced in China, all that Quad legacy was gone in a poof! I can write a Novel or even make a movie on Quad, based on my successes and sheer disasters with them but what's the point? I've already stated all my experiences with Quad on numerous occasions on other threads... so I'm tired of re-telling. So let's not go there.

Apart from that, yes! I'm not surprised at all on your findings in regards to better performance in your oval shaped room. In fact, that's the beauty of Peter Walker's design, he was a genius and absolute legend! PW's designs in Electrostats date way back early 50's. He had developed many prototypes and kept perfecting them even after the original ESL 57's. Those 57's would Arc often if over-driven and didn't sound too flash if under-driven. There were no protection circuits for over-load and pretty much quite a simple Electrostat in design. After about a decade, PW developed several new technologies and enhanced its design from top to bottom, such as:
1. Concentric ring anodes
2. Delay coils
3. Protection circuits
4. Added fuses
5. New HT tranny (High Tension) transformers made in England! Not China...

With these types of installations, PW's new stat design took full flight and the E Quad ESL 63's were the hallmark of Quad. The rest is history, and which way it went after his passing is a crying shame. Only those who are very passionate about Quads and ESL's in general, will know exactly what I'm referring to, and there's a handful of Stat experts who can refurb Quads to glorious levels, including the original 57's and 63's. However, this is a rare breed and most probably will be extinct, since it requires a very high skill. The time and effort it takes to refurb full range stats is a labour of love, it's no ordinary job and I've seen it done in my previous home during my ownership of the 989, 2905 and 2912's. Everything was basically changed internally except for the external structure, that's the only good thing from their new production facility. The outside looks tops! The inside... hell no!.

With these added techs built into all the Quads in production after the ESL 63's, enhanced their performance without a doubt, however it was reliability and durability amongst the biggest factors of multiple failures. That's something no one could fix, other than of course that passionate group of ESL techies.

Quads have a very unique dispersion pattern, incorporating the concentric ring anodes and delay coils, it allows the rear wave energy to virtually float in space, recreating a remarkable level of soundstage depth and perception. The further the Quads are away from the back/front wall, the depth in soundstage has a limitless expansion. They can virtually make the walls disappear! Also, with their delay coils, the signals are purposely delayed... this technology adds further depth and creates a presence of a full 3D holographic affect, where you can reach out and touch the musicians. It's marvellous!

So, in your particular room with virtually no walls in proxy... the Quads worked quite well since they don't heavily rely on walls to reinforce their performance. They're quite happy playing fine tunes regardless of critical positioning, and they'll continue to reproduce fine tunes with limited resources to ideal room settings. Way back In the 50's, when people owned ESL 57's, the majority of installation was just one Electrostat speaker! It was only after several iterations took place, that Quad started introducing two as in pairs for proper stereo setup. Even the 57's could play quite nicely, placed well away from walls.

The other thing with Quads and especially the newer production from IAG, is that now those Quads have four layers of protection on top of internal protection circuitry to protect from panel arcing.
1. There's one layer of fabric material.
2. Then the metal frames
3. A very thin transparent film of cling wrap on both front and back of each stat panels.
4. And finally the actual Stat panels (4 in the smaller ones (988, 2805 & 2812's) and 6 panels in the larger ones (989, 2905 & 2912's)

These layers also form a sort of reinforce stat cabinet type of enclosure so to speak. Therefore, there's some sort of structure either braced and glued, before the actual signal leaves the stat panels, passes through the transparent films of cling wrap, plus through all those layers of dust protection, plus the delay coils and ring anodes, thatcause a ripple effect, like a point source, and finally launches into the room. Walls... ? well not very critical, other than perhaps to reinforce a bit more LF.

Now, let's consider ML stats: there are no layers of dust protection whatsoever! No fabric, no metal guards, no damn cling wrap, and you can see right through the bloody panels!!!
These are the most transparent Electrostats on earth! They don't have delay coils nor concentric ring anodes whatsoever, and they're true dipoles that radiate equal energy front & back, and yes they require some sort of walls or structure to perform optimally because they're completely and utterly box-less, and totally free from any cabinet resonances or colorations. You can see right through the panels 100%, and their latest Clear Spars and Micro-perf stators made of X-stat and blade tech, comprising of several types of alloys, allows for even further levels of transparency!

Very similar to Maggie's, Alsyvox, Diptyque and Apogee's, true dipoles all require proper wall structures to perform optimally. Otherwise, they'll sound hollow! Like a woodpecker pecking away in a hollow tree.

Now, which type of Electrostats are better? I can't determine that, simply because everyone will have their personal preferences and varied listening tastes, listening habits, different gear and most of all completely different rooms! So the choice is yours. And... moving forwards, you now have AG Horns! Nice one matey.

Cheers, RJ

 

[Hear Here]

Attn: HH

Ah! The infamous Quads! What other Stats gain so much recognition for their rich history, and yet absolutely shabby quality control in their later models coming out of the "certified" Chinese factory, absolute disaster!

During Peter Walker's time, those were my favourite ESL's of all time! After he passed away, that legendary vision of fine Electrostats was long gone, and the moment they were bought over by IAG and production commenced in China, all that Quad legacy was gone in a poof! I can write a Novel or even make a movie on Quad, based on my successes and sheer disasters with them but what's the point? I've already stated all my experiences with Quad on numerous occasions on other threads... so I'm tired of re-telling. So let's not go there.

Apart from that, yes! I'm not surprised at all on your findings in regards to better performance in your oval shaped room. In fact, that's the beauty of Peter Walker's design, he was a genius and absolute legend! PW's designs in Electrostats date way back early 50's. He had developed many prototypes and kept perfecting them even after the original ESL 57's. Those 57's would Arc often if over-driven and didn't sound too flash if under-driven. There were no protection circuits for over-load and pretty much quite a simple Electrostat in design. After about a decade, PW developed several new technologies and enhanced its design from top to bottom, such as:
1. Concentric ring anodes
2. Delay coils
3. Protection circuits
4. Added fuses
5. New HT tranny (High Tension) transformers made in England! Not China...

With these types of installations, PW's new stat design took full flight and the E Quad ESL 63's were the hallmark of Quad. The rest is history, and which way it went after his passing is a crying shame. Only those who are very passionate about Quads and ESL's in general, will know exactly what I'm referring to, and there's a handful of Stat experts who can refurb Quads to glorious levels, including the original 57's and 63's. However, this is a rare breed and most probably will be extinct, since it requires a very high skill. The time and effort it takes to refurb full range stats is a labour of love, it's no ordinary job and I've seen it done in my previous home during my ownership of the 989, 2905 and 2912's. Everything was basically changed internally except for the external structure, that's the only good thing from their new production facility. The outside looks tops! The inside... hell no!.

With these added techs built into all the Quads in production after the ESL 63's, enhanced their performance without a doubt, however it was reliability and durability amongst the biggest factors of multiple failures. That's something no one could fix, other than of course that passionate group of ESL techies.

Quads have a very unique dispersion pattern, incorporating the concentric ring anodes and delay coils, it allows the rear wave energy to virtually float in space, recreating a remarkable level of soundstage depth and perception. The further the Quads are away from the back/front wall, the depth in soundstage has a limitless expansion. They can virtually make the walls disappear! Also, with their delay coils, the signals are purposely delayed... this technology adds further depth and creates a presence of a full 3D holographic affect, where you can reach out and touch the musicians. It's marvellous!

So, in your particular room with virtually no walls in proxy... the Quads worked quite well since they don't heavily rely on walls to reinforce their performance. They're quite happy playing fine tunes regardless of critical positioning, and they'll continue to reproduce fine tunes with limited resources to ideal room settings. Way back In the 50's, when people owned ESL 57's, the majority of installation was just one Electrostat speaker! It was only after several iterations took place, that Quad started introducing two as in pairs for proper stereo setup. Even the 57's could play quite nicely, placed well away from walls.

The other thing with Quads and especially the newer production from IAG, is that now those Quads have four layers of protection on top of internal protection circuitry to protect from panel arcing.
1. There's one layer of fabric material.
2. Then the metal frames
3. A very thin transparent film of cling wrap on both front and back of each stat panels.
4. And finally the actual Stat panels (4 in the smaller ones (988, 2805 & 2812's) and 6 panels in the larger ones (989, 2905 & 2912's)

These layers also form a sort of reinforce stat cabinet type of enclosure so to speak. Therefore, there's some sort of structure either braced and glued, before the actual signal leaves the stat panels, passes through the transparent films of cling wrap, plus through all those layers of dust protection, plus the delay coils and ring anodes, thatcause a ripple effect, like a point source, and finally launches into the room. Walls... ? well not very critical, other than perhaps to reinforce a bit more LF.

Now, let's consider ML stats: there are no layers of dust protection whatsoever! No fabric, no metal guards, no damn cling wrap, and you can see right through the bloody panels!!!
These are the most transparent Electrostats on earth! They don't have delay coils nor concentric ring anodes whatsoever, and they're true dipoles that radiate equal energy front & back, and yes they require some sort of walls or structure to perform optimally because they're completely and utterly box-less, and totally free from any cabinet resonances or colorations. You can see right through the panels 100%, and their latest Clear Spars and Micro-perf stators made of X-stat and blade tech, comprising of several types of alloys, allows for even further levels of transparency!

Very similar to Maggie's, Alsyvox, Diptyque and Apogee's, true dipoles all require proper wall structures to perform optimally. Otherwise, they'll sound hollow! Like a woodpecker pecking away in a hollow tree.

Now, which type of Electrostats are better? I can't determine that, simply because everyone will have their personal preferences and varied listening tastes, listening habits, different gear and most of all completely different rooms! So the choice is yours. And... moving forwards, you now have AG Horns! Nice one matey.

Cheers, RJ

Thanks for the explanation of why my Quad speakers sounded so much better in my room than Martin Logans, despite the huge price difference - MLs are twice the price of Quads.

I think you are being a little hard on Quad for outsourcing their speaker building to China. Certainly my own 2905s and the 2905s and a 2805 in my friend's system have none of the build shortfalls you mention. My own ones had been upgraded to 2912-spec at the Huntington HQ that Quad still retain (with about 50 staff) and my friend has recently had his 3 units similarly upgraded there and is very pleased with the improvements.

Meanwhile, I'll stick with my AG horn speakers, largely because of their exceptional imaging (a feature of good horns shared with good els speakers) and their lack of interest in wall location. AGs can be placed near or far from walls and are disinterested! They do need very careful setting up though.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Thanks for the explanation of why my Quad speakers sounded so much better in my room than Martin Logans, despite the huge price difference - MLs are twice the price of Quads.

I think you are being a little hard on Quad for outsourcing their speaker building to China. Certainly my own 2905s and the 2905s and a 2805 in my friend's system have none of the build shortfalls you mention. My own ones had been upgraded to 2912-spec at the Huntington HQ that Quad still retain (with about 50 staff) and my friend has recently had his 3 units similarly upgraded there and is very pleased with the improvements.

Meanwhile, I'll stick with my AG horn speakers, largely because of their exceptional imaging (a feature of good horns shared with good els speakers) and their lack of interest in wall location. AGs can be placed near or far from walls and are disinterested! They do need very careful setting up though.

Yes, it may seem as if I'm venting my frustrations out on Quads... but there's a long history to the several disasters I've had. This thread is not about Quads, nor is is about people's disasters with other types of stats. So I really don't want to derail this thread... and terribly sorry to those if I've annoyed anyone. No harm intended.

So I'll keep this simple as possible:
1. All three Quads were purchased brand new consecutively after each one failed.
2. Two of them failed before warranty (2yrs) and the other 2905's failed just after 2yrs.
3. The response I received from our Aus importer was along the lines... sorry about your Quad mishaps, just buy another pair! And so I did, 3 bloody pairs!!!
4. Two were promptly sold as soon as the authorised tech / service centre was able to get them to play tunes, and the last one 2905's I held onto until I turned green.
5. Multiple panel failures, multiple tranny failures and absolute shabby quality, internal wiring and the whole thing itself. I was in tears.
6. I wanted to hold onto that very last pair but 3 trannies on one channel failed big time! The mains HT (high tension) tramny actually blew up! Smoke was coming from the bottom, and caused a terrible burning smell. It was the good wifey who ran to my aid to shut the whole thing down because I was caught by surprise as what should I turn off first...???
7. Several trips back & forth to the authorised service centre, to no avail. They tried, nice guys but the owner told me in plain honest English, maaate, these stats are lemons! Doesn't happen to ML stats because we've got one inside for refurbing the bass drivers (old pair of Monolith's III) would you like to see them? And when I did, wow! What a difference in quality and parts, and these are dated way back few decades! My Quads were new production 2010, 2014 & 2016. Damn, I must have been extremely unlucky with this particular batch .. the QC guy must have been on a long coffee break and eating donuts!
8. The owner of the service centres said that he really doesn't want to put anymore effort & time trying to revive these, plus the amount of repair costs charged to me is rather unfair and a waste of money. He was honest! So I brought them home and got in touch with the Quad Whisperer, John Hall, based in Melb
9. JH got in touch with a chap (very very highly skilled in tranny designs) in Perth WA, to remake a complete set of trannies (Aussie made!). 6 trannies were shipped and fitted in 3 weeks. JH refurbed all 12 panels, plus replaced all blown out fuses and redid much of the wiring as possible. Put the 2905's back together, it took over 2 days to redo, and they sounded marvellous! Absolutely nothing like the Chinese production, no chance Charlie! I sold them to my ML dealer as a trade in for the CLX's and the rest is history!
10. All up, total bill for buying several pairs, plus useless repairs, other than the total refurb done by JH, a tidy 33grand! ($AUD) That kind of spend, I could have done so many many worthwhile things... but I'm a very patient person abd very passionate about stats, so I'll go the extra mile to get them fixed but there's a limit to this madness. No more! No thanks.

Apart from the good wife, and several other members on this forum (names withheld for sanity reasons...) warned me about this new production and said to tread cautiously. But I never listened to them not even the wifey... and learned the hard way. Burnt my fingers on several occasions! So, a bit harsh you say? I really don't think so. Here's a pic of the mains tranny that failed multiple times on all three pairs. As you can clearly see, the company name on the top plate... is faaar different to what Quad advertisers on their website. They show the actual Quad Acoustics tranny, then what the hell is this toy of a tranny doing inside Quads that cost nearly 15grand at the time I purchased. Now they cost over 20grand and use the same shabby parts. Not ever going there again.

For those who have refurbed their Quads, yes! Good on ya! They are marvellous designs of the legendary Peter Walker, without a doubt. So please do keep in close contact with your trusted skilled techies. Over here, sadly we don't have anyone who can fully referb Quads anymore... they're all retired, JH is no longer in contact, and the appointed ML service centre will not touch Quads. So as the importer said, "just buy another pair mate" ... all good, yeah right.

Sorry for the long rant but it's left a very bad taste, knowing the ins & outs of the original 57's and 63's that I enjoyed so much, it's a crying shame to experience these types of failures on such an iconic brand in Electrostat speakers. If PW knew what they were doing to his Quads and how they're going about it, he'd be in tears. Utter shame, nothing more to add.

Let's all carry on with the main topic, this will be the last & final time I need to explain my personal experiences with the new Quads... adios!
Do enjoy those fine tunes.
RJ